Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Why Should British Police Be Sent To Calais?
59 Answers
http://
Can't the French do ANYTHING for themselves? Why do they feel we have to get embroiled in this?
It's their problem, it's up to them to sort it out, isn't it?
Whilst I understand their plight, each country has their own unique set of problems to deal with, hardly our fault that there's a stretch of water called the English Channel that has helped keep out unwelcome visitors since time immemorial, is it?
Best they start dealing with the problem post haste, before Marine Le Pen gains even more popularity:
http://
Can't the French do ANYTHING for themselves? Why do they feel we have to get embroiled in this?
It's their problem, it's up to them to sort it out, isn't it?
Whilst I understand their plight, each country has their own unique set of problems to deal with, hardly our fault that there's a stretch of water called the English Channel that has helped keep out unwelcome visitors since time immemorial, is it?
Best they start dealing with the problem post haste, before Marine Le Pen gains even more popularity:
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ChillDoubt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Quizmonster
/// Lots of people fall asleep on lilos, Svejk, but let’s make it a kayak, then. He could have been a wide-awake dark-skinned right-wing-funding Bournemouth merchant banker who’d just made a major profit on the Stock Exchange and rather miscalculated the sea-conditions. Pity to lose HIM, I’m sure YOU’D
agree! ///
Still play it safe by dropping him on the shores of France, I am sure he could soon get in contact with his friends in England to come and get him.
/// Lots of people fall asleep on lilos, Svejk, but let’s make it a kayak, then. He could have been a wide-awake dark-skinned right-wing-funding Bournemouth merchant banker who’d just made a major profit on the Stock Exchange and rather miscalculated the sea-conditions. Pity to lose HIM, I’m sure YOU’D
agree! ///
Still play it safe by dropping him on the shores of France, I am sure he could soon get in contact with his friends in England to come and get him.
“The European borders are way more difficult to police than ours with people travelling across fields and byways to get to the closest port to the UK.”
They don’t have to travel across fields and byways, Maydup. Thanks to the ridiculous Schengen agreement which abolished the already flimsy borders between mainland EU countries, all they need to do is simply travel by any means they wish. All those arriving in the Italian island of Lampedusa (120,000 so far this year alone) are swiftly ushered across the border into France from where many of them immediately make their way northwards. The UK has not caused this problem and to lay the blame on our benefits system is not a valid argument.
"Britain is uniquely successful, even more than Germany, in attracting the most highly skilled and highly educated migrants in Europe."
Quite so. Britain is also uniquely successful in attracting all the waifs and strays from across the EU and beyond. I have not yet read the report referred to but I suspect it is highly selective in what it includes and what it does not. Although produced by a supposedly independent body the research was funded by the European Council. As I have outlined before there is absolutely no way that a person working for minimum wage can be a net contributor to the UK’s coffers and the vast majority of migrants from the EU undertake low pay low skilled work. Furthermore the report only deals with the financial aspects of immigration and does not touch on the social effects. Personally I’d sooner do without the extra money (if indeed it exists) and not see vast swathes of the country transformed beyond recognition.
The situation in Calais is a problem for the French to solve as it is a problem created by their government. They agreed to abandon their borders and they cannot now be surprised that the world and his wife (well, usually just the world as most of the migrants seem to be male) has crossed them.
They don’t have to travel across fields and byways, Maydup. Thanks to the ridiculous Schengen agreement which abolished the already flimsy borders between mainland EU countries, all they need to do is simply travel by any means they wish. All those arriving in the Italian island of Lampedusa (120,000 so far this year alone) are swiftly ushered across the border into France from where many of them immediately make their way northwards. The UK has not caused this problem and to lay the blame on our benefits system is not a valid argument.
"Britain is uniquely successful, even more than Germany, in attracting the most highly skilled and highly educated migrants in Europe."
Quite so. Britain is also uniquely successful in attracting all the waifs and strays from across the EU and beyond. I have not yet read the report referred to but I suspect it is highly selective in what it includes and what it does not. Although produced by a supposedly independent body the research was funded by the European Council. As I have outlined before there is absolutely no way that a person working for minimum wage can be a net contributor to the UK’s coffers and the vast majority of migrants from the EU undertake low pay low skilled work. Furthermore the report only deals with the financial aspects of immigration and does not touch on the social effects. Personally I’d sooner do without the extra money (if indeed it exists) and not see vast swathes of the country transformed beyond recognition.
The situation in Calais is a problem for the French to solve as it is a problem created by their government. They agreed to abandon their borders and they cannot now be surprised that the world and his wife (well, usually just the world as most of the migrants seem to be male) has crossed them.
But, Anotheoldgit, if I popped into Cherbourg with him, the authorities there would certainly say, "Mais, monsieur, you 'ave brought eem from international waterz, wot az 'e to do with us? As you Breetish 'ave eet...finderz keeperz, n'est-ce pas?"
(I hope no one is offended by my attempt to represent a French accent. But, if I have, that's tough. If 'Allo Allo' can get away with it, so can I!)
(I hope no one is offended by my attempt to represent a French accent. But, if I have, that's tough. If 'Allo Allo' can get away with it, so can I!)
Well, ludwig, it's the only way I can describe it.
I could add "lunatic", "outrageous", "preposterous", "absurd", "incredible", "nonsensical", "bizarre" - any (in fact all) of those adjectives could be reasonably used. France's problems in Calais stem from - or at the very least are severely aggravated by - that agreement and I don't think any of the words I used quite adequately describes it. It was first introduced in a very limited way in 1985 when th eUnion comprised just ten members. I recall very well when th UK negotiated its opt out from the scheme that critics suggested that it was all very well allowing free movement of people who were allowed to me in the Union (i.e. citizens of member states) but that it would also allow free movement of those not allowed to be here. The benefits it brings are far outweighed by the disagvantages it presents.
Fortunately the agreement's critics won the day here in the UK but France is suffering precisely the problems that were forecast. And much of it is a direct result of that "ridiculous" agreement. And that's their fault because they signed up to it.
I could add "lunatic", "outrageous", "preposterous", "absurd", "incredible", "nonsensical", "bizarre" - any (in fact all) of those adjectives could be reasonably used. France's problems in Calais stem from - or at the very least are severely aggravated by - that agreement and I don't think any of the words I used quite adequately describes it. It was first introduced in a very limited way in 1985 when th eUnion comprised just ten members. I recall very well when th UK negotiated its opt out from the scheme that critics suggested that it was all very well allowing free movement of people who were allowed to me in the Union (i.e. citizens of member states) but that it would also allow free movement of those not allowed to be here. The benefits it brings are far outweighed by the disagvantages it presents.
Fortunately the agreement's critics won the day here in the UK but France is suffering precisely the problems that were forecast. And much of it is a direct result of that "ridiculous" agreement. And that's their fault because they signed up to it.
-- answer removed --
Quizmonster
/// Nah, Anotheoldgit! Like Allo Allo's linguistic playfulness, mine was (a) funny and (b) totally non-political. Mike Read's was neither and hence not comparable. As I said, if you yourself are offended...tough! ///
Sounds very much like that I am not the one who is offended..... tough!!!!!
/// Nah, Anotheoldgit! Like Allo Allo's linguistic playfulness, mine was (a) funny and (b) totally non-political. Mike Read's was neither and hence not comparable. As I said, if you yourself are offended...tough! ///
Sounds very much like that I am not the one who is offended..... tough!!!!!
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.