The Student Room Group

calais migrants should claim asylum in france

Why are they so desperate to get in the UK?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by matt1001
Why are they so desperate to get in the UK?


Benefits, housing, a police force that won't dare touch them cause they will fear being called racist, some may want to come here to launch assaults, family ties
Duh, they are illegal migrants. They are breaking the geneva convention by not claiming asylum in the first safe country they enter, usually Turkey. If they are actually refugees, they are free to come here, but if they aren't (which is why they haven't) they are not allowed to enter the country, as they are not at risk.
Original post by matt1001
Why are they so desperate to get in the UK?


Because some of them have family here.
Some of them believe they get more benefits.
Some of them speak English.
Some of them believe Engalns is a more tolerant society in which to live.

Common sense reasons imo.
Original post by balanced
Duh, they are illegal migrants. They are breaking the geneva convention by not claiming asylum in the first safe country they enter, usually Turkey. If they are actually refugees, they are free to come here, but if they aren't (which is why they haven't) they are not allowed to enter the country, as they are not at risk.


This is utter nonsense. When they claim asylum they are asylum seekers. Only when their claim is rejected will they become economic migrants.

They are not breaking the Geneva Convention. They cam claim asylum where they want.
Original post by 999tigger
Because some of them have family here.
Some of them believe they get more benefits.
Some of them speak English.
Some of them believe Engalns is a more tolerant society in which to live.

Common sense reasons imo.


Those reasons are, frankly, not good enough to fail to apply for asylum in France, live in destitute conditions in Calais and make dangerous attempts to enter the UK unlawfully. France is a perfectly safe country and they should apply for asylum there. If they hate France so much, then why don't they make the (easier) land crossing to Belgium or another neighbouring country and apply for asylum there? Why risk their lives trying to illegally cross into an island surrounded by a massive maritime border?

Because some of them have family there - I am sure if they were granted asylum in France they would not be permanently prevented from travelling to the UK. If their family have UK citizenship (and EU travel rights), then why don't they visit them in France?
Some of them believe they get more benefits - a true refugee is not worried about the benefits they might receive but more worried about being given food and shelter in a safe place as soon as possible.
Some of them speak English - many people speak English in France and why can they not make an attempt to learn French? The French Government are not going to fail to process their asylum application and provide them with shelter and safety because they cannot speak French. Like our Government I am sure they offer interpreters.
Some of them believe England is a more tolerant society in which to live - that's subjective, but a true refugee will not be worried about which safe, Western country is slightly more tolerant than the other.

I appreciate that these people want to try to get the best life that they can and (for some reason) think Britain can offer the most prosperous standard of living, but I don't think such motivations make them genuine refugees.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Lady Comstock
Those reasons are, frankly, not good enough to fail to apply for asylum in France, live in destitute conditions in Calais and make dangerous attempts to enter the UK unlawfully. France is a perfectly safe country and they should apply for asylum there. If they hate France so much, then why don't they make the (easier) land crossing to Belgium or another neighbouring country and apply for asylum there? Why risk their lives trying to illegally cross into an island protected by a massive maritime border?

Because some of them have family there - I am sure if they were granted asylum in France they would not be permanently prevented from travelling to the UK. If their family have UK citizenship, then why don't they visit them in France?
Some of them believe they get more benefits - a true asylum seeker is not worried about the benefits they might receive but more worried about being given food and shelter in a safe place as soon as possible.
Some of them speak English - many people speak English in France and why can they not make an attempt to learn French?
Some of them believe England is a more tolerant society in which to live - that's subjective, but a true asylum seeker will not be worried about which safe, Western country is slightly more tolerant than the other.

I appreciate that these people want to try to get the best life that they can and (for some reason) think Britain can offer the most prosperous standard of living, but I don't think such motivations make them genuine refugees.


They might not be good enough reasons in your eyes, but clearly they are for the people in Calais. they obviously believe they will get across eventually and they think its worth the risk.

1. Family: Because if you find half your family is already in the UK including your kids or wife, then you are going to wnat to be with them. You arent going to wait 5 years. They also probide a readymade support system.

2. If they are asylum seekers then they arent allowed to leave the country and return.

3.Again its not your decision to make , its theirs. there are a number of motivating factors, so perceived benefits are just part of the mix.

4. Why learn to speka french when you cna already speak English, it just makes life easier. the English are famous for refusing to learn other peoples languages.

5. Ofc you wnat to be in the best country where you cna be safe and have a life. If you feel thats going to be in England then ofc you are going to want to claim asylum there. That's what they are doing.

I never said that all of the reasons they might have are in fact true, but look at any interviews and research on why they want to move to the UK and its becayse they think its clearly a better choice and they are willing to take the risk and try to cross.
Original post by 999tigger
They might not be good enough reasons in your eyes, but clearly they are for the people in Calais. they obviously believe they will get across eventually and they think its worth the risk.

I am not denying that they hold those motivations but I am saying that they don't make them genuine refugees nor do those motivations place a burden on the UK to offer them asylum.

1. Family: Because if you find half your family is already in the UK including your kids or wife, then you are going to wnat to be with them. You arent going to wait 5 years. They also probide a readymade support system.


Why don't the family visit them if they have UK citizenship and EU travel rights?

2. If they are asylum seekers then they arent allowed to leave the country and return.


And if they are granted asylum? Do you have a source to say that people granted asylum in France are never permitted to travel to the UK?

3.Again its not your decision to make , its theirs. there are a number of motivating factors, so perceived benefits are just part of the mix.


Yes of course, but I think that having such a motivation, to the point where you are not willing to claim asylum in France, invalidates someone being a genuine refugee.

4. Why learn to speka french when you cna already speak English, it just makes life easier. the English are famous for refusing to learn other peoples languages.


Is it really worth living in destitution in Calais and making live-threatening journeys to the UK on the basis that you can't be bothered to learn French?

5. Ofc you wnat to be in the best country where you cna be safe and have a life. If you feel thats going to be in England then ofc you are going to want to claim asylum there. That's what they are doing.


I am not disputing that they have that motivation, but I am saying it invalidates their claim to be a genuine refugee and does not put any responsibility on the UK to grant them asylum.
1. Whether or not they are refugees is to be decided by the application of the UN Convention on Refugees.

2. Some of the family wont be UK citizens yet. Makes far more sense to have someone living in the same country rather than having to travel abroad to see them.

3. People granted asylum are allowed residence in the country they are granted asylum in. That doesnt involve the right to leave the country and return. they may later get citizenship rights but that would be 5+ years down the line.

4. Again just because they dont seek asylum in France doesnt invalidate their claim. They can claim where they want. Whether they are a genuine refugee or not depends upon them being able to prove they are fleeing persecution as laid out in the Convention.

5. How do you know some of them dont in fact learn French? As I said they have a number of reasons to wnat to come to the UK and they weigh them up to reach the conclusion they wnat to go to the UK.

6. You might wnat to read the 1951 Convention on refugees then you cna understand the rules that apply.
Reply 9
Original post by 999tigger
Because some of them have family here.
Some of them believe they get more benefits.
Some of them speak English.
Some of them believe Engalns is a more tolerant society in which to live.

Common sense reasons imo.


that is what the media is suggesting
Reply 10
I don't want them in France either.
Original post by TeeEm
that is what the media is suggesting


Do you know different? Does it really matter?
Original post by 999tigger
This is utter nonsense. When they claim asylum they are asylum seekers. Only when their claim is rejected will they become economic migrants.

They are not breaking the Geneva Convention. They cam claim asylum where they want.

Face palm. Please learn something before you claim something. Until they can prove that they are refugees, they have no right to move out of the first country of entry.
Original post by balanced
Face palm. Please learn something before you claim something. Until they can prove that they are refugees, they have no right to move out of the first country of entry.


The Convention does not impose any restrictions on where they can claim asylum. There is nothing that requires them to make a claim in France, so they are perfectly entitled to have their cmaim considered in the UK if they make it here.

Care to point out where this is dealt with in the Geneva convention as you claim?
Most in Calais are trying to get into the UK because they have relations, family and friends here. Especially for the orphaned children among them.
1. Whether someone is a refugee is decuded by givernments and the law. The fact that you disagree with the law is up to you but it deosnt make any difference.

2. If you had your family in one country then ofc you would try to be with them instead of abandoning them for five years, Completely illogical not to want to be with your family. Completely illogical not to wnat to be where you think you have the best chance at a new life.

3. Source
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1432131345394&uri=CELEX:02003L0109-20110520

When an asylum seeker is granted refugee status, its for that country only. It takes a min of 5 years of continuous residence before they have freedom of movement. they are initially granted a residence visa and it can take 5-10 years for them to be granted citizenship, which would give them a passport.

http://eudo-citizenship.eu/docs/7-Naturalisation%20Policies%20in%20Europe.pdf#page=10


4. You should go and read the 1951 Convention and understand how asylum law works.
To be fair, unless you currently speak French and no English or have family in France, nobody in their right mind would choose to live in France over Britain.
Original post by matt1001
Why are they so desperate to get in the UK?

Ironically, law states asylum seekers mus claim asylum in the first safe country they reach, which is France. We really should take an australian style approach to migrants.
Original post by A$aprocky
Ironically, law states asylum seekers mus claim asylum in the first safe country they reach, which is France. We really should take an australian style approach to migrants.


No it doesnt. there is nothing which dictates where asylum seekers have to make their claim.
There are some Dyblin Rules, which states which country in the EU takes responsibility , but they dont work.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by 999tigger
No it doesnt. there is nothing which dictates where asylum seekers have to make their claim.


No they dont have to make claim but the Geneva convention does state they must make their claim in the first safe country. By these grounds, the UK can deny any 'refugee' asylum since they could have claimed it in France. I guess its not law but it is stated in the Geneva convention.

Quick Reply

Latest