British Government refuses France's request to take in 1,500 'child' refugees

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/29/france-demands-that-britain-accept-nearly-1500-migrant-children/

Britain refuses France's request to take in 1,500 'child' refugees


http://217.218.67.233/photo/20160816/965fa267-09a6-433d-864f-2acc5a679728.jpg
British Prime Minister Theresa May


British Prime Minister Theresa May has refused to bow to a personal demand from French President Francois Hollande to help take in 1,500 child migrants from Calais.

In an escalation of tensions between the two nations over the “Jungle” camp, the French President made clear in a telephone call to Mrs May his displeasure with Britain’s efforts to help those affected.

Mr Hollande went public with details of the call on Saturday as he sought to hold off political pressure from his rivals over his handling of the migrant crisis.

He told a crowd at a reception centre in western France that Mrs May had been told to make sure British officials would take in more child refugees.

Meanwhile more than 100 left-wing French politicians wrote to Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, demanding “immediate” action and questioning whether the UK was living up to its “moral duty”.

However Mrs May is understood to have refused to agree any new targets, with the country instead focusing on meeting existing promises.

The “Jungle” camp was dismantled this week, with most of those living there – between 6,000 and 8,000 migrants – taken to asylum centres to have their applications processed.

However around 1,500 unaccompanied child migrants are being temporarily sheltered in shipping containers on the site of the original Jungle camp.

French and British officials have been blaming each other for failing to deal with the refugees in time before the bulldozers moved in to dismantle the camp on Tuesday.

Britain has already taken more than 300 children from the Jungle. When the first groups arrived in the UK last week, some appeared to be well into adulthood, sparking a row over whether the Home Office and charities were screening them properly.

Charity workers in Calais have since acknowledged that some adults were mistakenly allowed into Britain.

They said the screening process was hindered by adults who posed as children, overloading the system and preventing some genuine children from being considered.

Nice to finally see some backbone.

Tell the French to get lost. It's not our fault or responsibility to cover the failings of the French Republic in securing their borders. At the end of the day if France wants minimal border security then they can, don't blame us for the result.

If they insist on a public slanging match then maybe publically suggest the solution to Calais is a President Le Pen. ;)

[AgnesIO]

"British Government refuses France's request to take in 1,500 'child' refugees"
Article: "help take in 1,500 child migrants from Calais."

Your thread title is on par with a headline from the Sun.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Oh don't be daft. What else does "take in" mean other than bring them to these shores?

The French are desperate to offload some on to us given the rising numbers at Calais. Britain says Non!

[AgnesIO]

Oh don't be daft. What else does "take in" mean other than bring them to these shores?

The French are desperate to offload some on to us given the rising numbers at Calais. Britain says Non!

lol when your own post contradicts your own title.

[dbgtz]

I'm glad we have another chance to piss off our closest land neighbour who not only will have a large influence when it comes to trade negotation with an independent UK, but also holds the border in their country. Excellent.

Not suggesting we should take any, but it's not a black and white issue as you always seem to like to paint it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm glad we have another chance to piss off our closest land neighbour who not only will have a large influence when it comes to trade negotation with an independent UK, but also holds the border in their country. Excellent.

Not suggesting we should take any, but it's not a black and white issue as you always seem to like to paint it.

The issue is very black and white. We decide who comes here, not the government of the French Republic.

That's kinda what the referendum was all about after all.

[dbgtz]

The issue is very black and white. We decide who comes here, not the government of the French Republic.

That's kinda what the referendum was all about after all.

Well if you read my first sentence, you will realise it is not.

[-:Undertaker:-]

so go on then what do you say to the French who want us to take more refugees if it isn't yes or no dbgtz;

answers from those lurking in the dark welcome too scottish; The Don;

[dbgtz]

so go on then what do you say to the French who want us to take more refugees if it isn't yes or no dbgtz;

answers from those lurking in the dark welcome too scottish; The Don;

I don't know? All I was trying to point out is that there is this thing called diplomacy as you like to bang on about when it comes to being a "free" country where you make your own trade deals and such. Pissing off your neighbours too frequently will definitely not help when it comes to negotiation.

Thankfully I'm not in a position to make or affect these negotiations, but even better, neither are you. Unfortunately what we do have is men like Boris Johnson which is an absolute joke.

[ihatehash]

I think a huge issue as someone who has recently moved to the UK is if they did come into the country what happens then? This country is fucking expensive. Just getting set up here has made me nearly broke and I actually have money. I have no idea how a family of refugees would make it here with out a huge helping from the government. Please understand I am very much pro immigration but I feel allowing in this many refugees who will be reliant on the government to establish themselves in this country is a huge strain

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't know? All I was trying to point out is that there is this thing called diplomacy as you like to bang on about when it comes to being a "free" country where you make your own trade deals and such. Pissing off your neighbours too frequently will definitely not help when it comes to negotiation.

Thankfully I'm not in a position to make or affect these negotiations, but even better, neither are you. Unfortunately what we do have is men like Boris Johnson which is an absolute joke.

exactly, you don't know so it was just a chance to have a stab at me who at least does know what he want & can say it.

and what are you linking trade deals with this for? it's a very strange EU mindset that trade has anything to do with border controls or above all asylum policy. The Dominion of Canada just signed a trade deal with the EU and guess what? the French don't have any say on Canadian refugee, asylum or immigration policy as Canada is not in the EU. it's the same with us. stop conflating trade + borders.

if the French started linking what form of government they thought we should have (a republic rather than monarchy) tommorow with their trade policy with us then we'd rightly ask 'what?' and tell them to get lost. same here with refugees.

[dbgtz]

exactly, you don't know so it was just a chance to have a stab at me who at least does know what he want & can say it.

and what are you linking trade deals with this for? it's a very strange EU mindset that trade has anything to do with border controls or above all asylum policy. The Dominion of Canada just signed a trade deal with the EU and guess what? the French don't have any say on Canadian refugee, asylum or immigration policy as Canada is not in the EU. it's the same with us. stop conflating trade + borders.

if the French started linking what form of government they thought we should have (a republic rather than monarchy) tommorow with their trade policy with us then we'd rightly ask 'what?' and tell them to get lost. same here with refugees.

But you say that not actually knowing the consequence of what you say. Everyone likes to pretend they're an expert but you do not know how this will affect any kind of deal in future. I'm not suggesting to bow down to their request, all I am saying is don't be surprised when they do something which will negatively impact us. Yes, it is likely this one event will not have huge impact, but who knows what else we've done to piss off the French (and other) governments. You can't just keep giving other countries the middle finger but expect them to give you a great trade deal.

Also, don't compare our form of government to accepting some immigrants, that's very different and you know it is. However, I would bet if enough countries took action against us because of our form of government, then I see it being changed fairly quickly.

[-:Undertaker:-]

But you say that not actually knowing the consequence of what you say. Everyone likes to pretend they're an expert but you do not know how this will affect any kind of deal in future. I'm not suggesting to bow down to their request, all I am saying is don't be surprised when they do something which will negatively impact us. Yes, it is likely this one event will not have huge impact, but who knows what else we've done to piss off the French (and other) governments. You can't just keep giving other countries the middle finger but expect them to give you a great trade deal.

To say we are pissing them off implies that we're acting in an irrational manner or being unreasonable. It is not unreasonable to say that the asylum policy of Her Majesty's Government has jack all to do with the President of the French Republic.

If anyone should be pissed off it is us for them daring to demand we tailor our refugee policy to their demands when the situation at Calais is solely their responsibility and that of the European Union for failing to control their borders.

If they then wish to use trade as a weapon then let them, who cares? Diplomacy is about calling bluff and not bowing down.

[dbgtz]

To say we are pissing them off implies that we're acting in an irrational manner or being unreasonable. It is not unreasonable to say that the asylum policy of Her Majesty's Government has jack all to do with the President of the French Republic.

If anyone should be pissed off it is us for them daring to demand we tailor our refugee policy to their demands when the situation at Calais is solely their responsibility and that of the European Union for failing to control their borders.

If they then wish to use trade as a weapon then let them, who cares? Diplomacy is about calling bluff and not bowing down.

So as you have pissed me off, does that make you irrational or unreasonable? So no, pissing off does not imply someone acting irrationally unless you care to admit you are irrational. In such a globalised and connected world, the unfortunate truth is most of our decisions and laws will have impact on other countries in some shape or form and vice versa.

That is also not diplomacy in the slightest.