‘Clandestines' prompt British border blockade in France Four kilometres of Blighty's National Barrier Asset – a collection of temporary security barriers – has been deployed to Coquelles, the location of the Channel Tunnel terminal in France, to provide additional border security to the UK. Talking to The Telegraph, James Brokenshire, the Minister for Security and Immigration – a …
They do, they started planning for it in 1980, had various committees and discussions on the height. It overshot budget by 6bn pound and is run by G4S but the cost of storing it is covered by the taxpayer. The government also have to pay the Queen a fee of 8m every time it's deployed outside Buckingham Palace due to it obscuring of the view. Next year they are installing oyster card points on the doors so they can charge you for the privilege of passing through this modern wonder of the world.
"Finally, someone thought of the refugees. Oh..."
Indeed. I'm not even going to start on the issue of how we deal with the refugee problem, greater minds than mine seem equally stumped. I was just interested to see the article picture; a scene from the excellent 'Children of Men', based on the book by PD James, where she writes about refugees being hunted like cockroaches.
Makes you step back and think, at a time when when you have a notorious Sun columnist writing "These migrants are like cockroaches..."
This post has been deleted by its author
360'000 dead or wounded is NOT "dropping pants".
Lets have a little more clarity on the figures as the ones you give are as meaningless as the KSI figure for road accidents. The French lost about 200k military personnel, while Britain lost about 400k. Consider total deaths, which includes civilians, and France hits about 600k while we had about 450k
Much as I enjoy ribbing the French, I quite agree that their losses are not "dropping pants", and take umbridge only at the type of number you used. .
It's also worth pointing out that the French resistance refined the concept of a resistance movement into a fine science. Their concept of breaking into individual cells, where no one member can reveal more than one other cell worked well. They took what others had done, tweaked it and reworked it and came out with a resistance movement that was highly effective and crucial to winning the war.
Perhaps more to the point, French civilians - including women, who were not considered combat-ready individuals during WWII - fought and died in the resistance. The French government surrendered to save it's people, but the French people fought for their homes and and repeatedly risked everything to help all of Europe.
Add in groups like the Maquis and I think you'll find the French weren't faint of heart during the war.
".....the French resistance refined the concept of a resistance movement into a fine science....." Kind of. The French resistance was made up of roughly two parts - the Free French loyalists and the Communists. The loyalists were largely pre-War French serving men and civil servants who could not escape the German invasion in 1940 and so did what they could. Over time, small groups were contacted by MI6 and involved in British spying missions, eventually moving to more active sabotage roles. However, the Communists were much more organized and already working in cells in 1940, having done so for most of the Thirties whilst they sabotaged French efforts to re-arm. The Communists, on the orders of Stalin, did NOTHING to impede the German invasion, often deliberately impeding the efforts of their own armed forces and occasionally actively assisting the Nazi invaders. That was the Communist policy until the Germans invaded Russia in 1941, after which the Communists acted again only on Stalin's orders, spending a lot of time and effort on hunting down Free French loyalists instead.
No ship allowed to dock in Dover unless all vehicles aboard have been searched in port in Calais after loading. Of course this allow far fewer ships to sale from Calais so most of the traffic would be diverted to Belgium. How long would it take the Frogs to realise that the value to Calais of the cross-channel trade is worth beefing up their security?
Bad spelling, lack of definite articles and vaguely angry "must do something" proposal exhibiting scant reflection on economic and logistic issues (does Belgium even have spare capacity?). Resorts to wifebeater levels of frenchie bashing.
Yup, yet another Gb2 Daily Mail.
The only way to stop people coming here illegally is to either admit everyone such that there can be no illegal arrivals, which isn't realistic, or to admit nobody that hasn't applied to come here through our process for doing such.
Taking the latter approach as the only one that can work, what we should do is search every vehicle entering [1], loading up all undocumented people or those with no rights of entry, and putting them aboard a slow boat to the French Riviera [2]. This would apply to anyone found here with no leave to remain. On the day of docking, breakfast and lunch would be provided, but the evening meal would be for the French to arrange. Disembarkation would begin at 8pm.
Once the rich and shameless of France get used to having 1000s of hungry refugees dropped into their playground, they'll start taking the matter a bit more seriously. We don't need to work out whether someone originated in Afghanistan, Ethiopia, or Sudan - We know they all came here from France, so that is the place of safety to which they should be returned [3]. Let France deal with their lack of documentation.
The side benefit is that it's in the south of France, so any repeated attempt at crossing would first require them to make their way through the middle of France, which will take them some time, and cause plenty of issues for the French along the way [4]. This will reduce the deaths and injuries caused by trying to gain illegal entry to Britain, as doing so would quickly become pointless.
Asylum seekers stop at the first place of safety. These people are economic migrants. There is nothing wrong with that, but they need to follow our control processes for admittance at a rate the country can manage.
1 - Requiring transparent sidings on trucks would make this much easier.
2 - Appropriate medical care, food, shelter, and clothing can be provided enroute.
3 - There is nothing inhumane about sending people to France. We've been doing it to our school children for decades.
4 - France can be expected to object, but if the boat is a Royal Navy vessel, that is all they will do.
France can be expected to object, but if the boat is a Royal Navy vessel, that is all they will do.
You know, I'm not really convinced that "la royale" will be a pushover to the real royal navy...
Managed and kept by Sussex Police ... the NBA is available for use by all UK police forces for deployment at security sensitive sites or major events.
Of course, Sussex is just so central within the UK. The obvious location to store an item that is available to all of the UK.
We addressed your concern to a member of Her Majesty's Government, who responded "What's the problem? Looks central enough from my perspective."
These are not refugees in any shape or form, they are economic migrants. To get to France itself they would have to have traversed other safe EU states having entered Europe via southern EU states such as Greece, Italy and Spain. If they were really refugees they would have stopped there, instead they are making for the UK for purely economic reasons. As such they do not deserve any special treatment, and that is a fact under EU and international law, even the fruitcakes at The Guardian have been forced to admit so (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position). Any "refugee" currently camped in Calais should have been processed as such by the French and either accepted into France or sent back to the first legally safe country they came via on their way to France.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
