The Invasion Continues

Last week 1,200 illegal immigrants crossed the Channel in small boats in a single day, unchallenged and unhindered by the French, and welcomed with housing and benefits by the British.

No wonder voters are angry. The pictures show healthy young men filling the dinghies, not the weak and dispossessed whom the Conventions and Human Rights Acts are supposed to protect. As they have to raise several thousand pounds each for the journey, it is little surprise that they are relatively prosperous, while the people traffickers grow fat on their determination and ambition.

In itself, seeking a better life is not an ignoble attribute. Those who come are not axiomatically bad people, but they have neither a right nor a need to be here. The post-war conventions were intended to prevent a 1940s style massacre of a whole people, who were not able to flee in the 1930s as danger rose. They were not intended to allow the mass movement from poor countries to richer ones. They were not intended to override normal immigration rules which had grown up around the world as travel became easier from the beginning of the 20^th century.

There are several reasons why asylum has become open to abuse. The rule that people must claim asylum in the first safe state they reach is routinely ignored. The first point of entry is not normally France, and is almost never the United Kingdom. This may seem unfair, as we are protected by the sea, but it is logical. Most legitimate asylum seekers will be safe in a neighbouring country, from which they will be able to return to their home country once it has stabilised. Refugees are meant to be able to be safe, not to choose the richest country to go to.