Judge rules refugees in Calais must be brought to the UK

Build a wall and make them pay, that will solve it.

Wut? The wall is the channel between England and France? You didn't find all the other instances of families being accepted into the UK like I asked you to. Also.. make them pay for what? The vast majority are doing nothing but fleeing their country, we should treat them with some respect as we aren't the victims of war.

The wall should brick up the channel tunnel. You asked me nothing Craig.

So you've randomly selected a news article from the thousands of other cases that have happened? Surely some other refugees would have applied to live in the UK with their families?

Didn't you read a recent article about the Calais jungle? A Dutch film maker was filming the conditions there when 3 migrants pinned him down and one tried to stab him.

Do I want these scum who have no respect for British values to come over here? No I don't.

As for the article, it's only four people who have family here. Not too bad but wouldn't let anyone in.

Mrs Sheldon Cooper - Actually it was two young looking men, one holding a knife, who pushed over the two filmmakers (not exactly pinned down, but there was a small struggle). We cannot say if he intended to stab, or was just threatening, can we? They were VERY quickly chased off by other migrants nearby. The filmmakers, who were both unharmed, said afterwards that there are muggers in every community. They understood that a very small minority, living under such deplorable conditions, may become small-time criminals. This incident does NOT mean all migrants are scum! The vast majority in the Calais camp are refugees fleeing from life-threatening conditions. Shame on you!

Tuna - Your reference refers to a 2008 article which has never been substantiated

At the time, Father Jean-Pierre Boutoille, of the refugee charity C’Sur, said: “There are lots of journalists, including students, who come here to get to the heart of what’s going on, to write reports and produce films.“When reporters contact us, we always ask to accompany them. We know the refugees as we see them everyday.“We would never allow a young female adventurer in this wood, especially not at night. On Tuesday we did not receive any requests for assistance, and nor did any other charities.” (2008).

The question mark refers to the end of a question. What other news articles are there that show this has happened, thousands of times?

So if we go with your solution to 'brick up the channel tunnel', that solves the faintly-existent problem of refugees in our country, but it leaves thousands of migrants in the Calais jungle and the surrounding areas, aswell as in Germany, Sweden, Norway etc. That does not solve anything for the rest of Europe - they'd be asking us for help as we aren't doing anything else. It also creates a much more compact spread of refugees in places like Germany, increasing the likelihood for attacks like the New Year ones.

Also, closing up the tunnel leaves a horrible hole in our trade with Europe. I don't know a lot about how much trade comes in to the Calais port but there are a plentiful of lorries that come in on a daily basis, there must be some effect there. We'd be losing tons of produce as the rest of Europe would not be able to trade with us, it would increase the prices of food and other items on the shelves as it becomes more of a rarity.

It's also an extremely impractical issue for a few reasons. Firstly, tourism to and from the UK would be damaged due to the lack of cars and trains unable to use the channel tunnel. That leaves ferrys that go across the channel, but even then that would be impractical due to the increased need for ferrys as there are no other means of getting across. Also, the lack of need for the tunnel would cut jobs for the trains running through, aswell as any maintenence needed and jobs that are needed on the other side of the border (i.e. people travelling from England to France or vice versa on a daily basis).

I could go on, but what the government needs to consider when they look into these sorts of things is the effect on the rest of Europe and our own economy. This idea would get shot down for the reasons above and other reasons like lack of materials for infrastructure and the tunnel falling into disrepair. Drastic, one step 'solutions' that would stop the refugee issue in the UK directly, may impact on so many other features of the UK, it would simply be illogical to continue with them.

Tuna - Your reference refers to a 2008 article which has never been substantiated

At the time, Father Jean-Pierre Boutoille, of the refugee charity C’Sur, said: “There are lots of journalists, including students, who come here to get to the heart of what’s going on, to write reports and produce films.“When reporters contact us, we always ask to accompany them. We know the refugees as we see them everyday.“We would never allow a young female adventurer in this wood, especially not at night. On Tuesday we did not receive any requests for assistance, and nor did any other charities.” (2008).

And most misleading thread title of the year goes tooooooooooooooooooooo...............

this one.

Seriously? The article you linked is titled 'Four Syrian refugees must be brought from Calais camp to Britain, judges rule', FOUR, f, o, u, r. They have relatives in Britain too. The article also says they're Syrian, and they don't deserve the hellish situation in the Calais camp to escape the hellish situation in Syria.

Mrs Sheldon Cooper - Actually it was two young looking men, one holding a knife, who pushed over the two filmmakers (not exactly pinned down, but there was a small struggle). We cannot say if he intended to stab, or was just threatening, can we? They were VERY quickly chased off by other migrants nearby. The filmmakers, who were both unharmed, said afterwards that there are muggers in every community. They understood that a very small minority, living under such deplorable conditions, may become small-time criminals. This incident does NOT mean all migrants are scum! The vast majority in the Calais camp are refugees fleeing from life-threatening conditions. Shame on you!

Life threatening conditions? Most are migrants. If you don't know what that means look it up.
Aww you poor naive little thing.. You clearly haven't heard that the migrants end up making a profit out of clothes that are generously being donated by the public,you haven't heard how migrants tried to assault a coach driver so they could drive into the Eurotunnel have you? And you clearly haven't heard about the Cologne attacks or when a man groped a woman because he thought German women were for sex or when migrants in Germany began to demand for an apartment and a car have you?

You say shame on me for not wanting men who come from a backward,misogynistic to come to Britain because I value my freedom. I say shame on you for being so naive.

Why can't France house them?

I'm not denying there are continuing tensions at Calais. However, the camp is very mainly habitated by REFUGEES! - caused largely by the displacement of people from war-torn countries such as Syria, Eritrea, Iraq, Afghanistan, and also North Africa countries - give us your source if you dispute this please.

Under the 1951 Refugee Convention and a string of EU laws, European countries must offer refuge or other types of protection to asylum-seekers who can demonstrate that they are fleeing war or persecution. (Please remember though that this issue is not just a european one, but a growing issue for the rest of the world too). Europe is under no such obligation to those looking to improve their prospects, even if they have left behind lives of destitution. However, the legal distinction between refugees and economic migrants often fails to capture the complex mixture of motives that drive migration. War may be the catalyst - refugees may then wish to be as economically secure as possible.( Large numbers of migrants who, according to data, have fled from countries stricken by war and/or the growing politjcal unrest and the oppression of dictatorship.) However, EU ruling does not allow them the 'choice' of selecting their new country.

Many of us in the UK are lucky to have been born in a relatively peaceful country. It not easy to imagine what these people have been through. If it is 'naive' to NOT be a 'little englander', then so be it!

So the charitable people who know the migrants blame the victim for not seeking bodyguards. Setting aside that outrageous piece of spin, are these people we want admitted to the UK? I personally want to be able to walk the streets without a bodyguard.

You realise most the people at Calais (and migrants in general) are economic migrants. If the were in danger they would have settled in a more eastern European country not one that 'believe' gives the most state welfare benefits. If you dont have the the mental capacity to process look at where the migrants end up, Sweden, Denmark, Germany ect.

a small minority!! like the 1,000 immigrants who carried attacks on women in Cologne, or in Finland, Sweden, Switzerland or Austria get real