The largest study yet carried out into the health records of people held in detention in Australian immigration prisons*, and published in the latest issue of the Medical Journal of Australia, shows that the length of time in detention and the reasons for that detention had a significant effect on the rate of new mental health problems among detainees.
The evidence appears to show that the longer the period of detention, the higher the rate of mental health problems. Those eventually designated as asylum seekers also displayed similar higher rates of mental health problems. Amongst those held for more than a year, mental health, social and musculoskeletal problems were common against the more common dental and respiratory conditions, and lacerations found amongst shorter-term detainees.
According to Prof Kathy Eagar, Professor of Health Services Research and Director of the Centre for Health Service Development at the University of Wollongong, "The health of people in immigration detention has attracted considerable attention. In particular, there is almost universal criticism of the policy of detaining asylum seekers, particularly in terms of the mental health implications."
In an accompanying editorial in the MJA, Dr Christine Phillips, Senior Lecturer in General Practice and Community Health at the Australian National University, writes: "The evidence is growing that asylum seekers are likely to be those most psychologically damaged by immigration detention, and that their children are particularly vulnerable."
"There is a good case to be made on health grounds that immigration detention should be used in very limited ways for asylum seekers, and never for children."
* 720 detainees' heath records from the 2005-06 financial year were used.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Monday, 18 January 2010
Statement In Opposition To Arora International Hotels Ltd. Planning Application No. CR/2009/0421/COU
The following statement has been sent to all 37 Crawley Borough councillors and to the local Crawley MP Laura Moffet in advance of next Monday's council planning committee meeting. Copies, together with a press statement have been sent to local and national press.
The Arora International Hotels chain wishes to convert the 254-bed Mercure Hotel in Povey Cross Road, Crawley into an Immigration Removal Centre. Due to the nature of the existing building and the site it occupies, it could only be converted into a detention centre to house families and children.
The detention of children in immigration prisons has long been condemned by authorities around the globe for the adverse physical and psychological effects it has on them. In this country these have included the Children's Commissioner for England Sir Alan Aynsley-Green, Refugee and Migrant Justice (formerly the Refugee Legal Centre) and the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee to name but a few.
Just this month (December 2009), the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of General Practitioners and the Faculty of Public Health (and endorsed by the Royal College of Nursing) published a briefing paper entitled 'Significant Harm - the effects of administrative detention on the health of children, young people and their families', which declared that the administrative detention of children is unacceptable and should cease without delay.
Gatwick is already the site of two Immigration Removal Centres, Tinsley House and Brook House, both the source of recent criticism. In particular, Tinsley House is the subject of a highly critical report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Dame Anne Owers, regarding an unannounced short follow-up inspection on 13–15 July 2009, published on 18 December. The report described the arrangements for children at Tinsley House as "wholly unacceptable" and criticised the "prison-like culture" and the "limited access to fresh air" of the children imprisoned there.
We the undersigned call on Arora International Hotels to unconditionally withdraw their application for change of use of Mercure Hotel and, failing that, for Crawley Borough Council to reject the application at the earliest opportunity. Imprisoning children for the 'crime' of being a migrant is totally unacceptable and nobody should encourage others to profit from the activity, whatever the situation.
signatures:
Dr Caroline Lucas - Green Party MEP for SE England
Ben Duncan Brighton and Hove City Councillor, Green Party parliamentary candidate & member of Sussex Police Authority
Tony Greenstein - Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre
Helen M. Hintjens - Senior Lecturer in Development and Social Justice, International Institute of Social Studies, University of Rotterdam
No Borders Brighton
London No Borders
Manchester No Borders
No Borders South Wales
No One Is Illegal
Barbed Wire Britain Network to End Refugee and Migrant Detention
Communities Of Resistance (CoRe)
Fight Racism Fight Imperialism
Detainee Solidarity London
Stop Deportations Network
Kent Refugee Help
Migrant English Project (Brighton)
Long Journey Home
Ethnic Arts Group
Cardiff Refugee & Asylum Seeker Welcome
Cardiff STAR
Cardiff People & Planet
Cardiff University Green Party
SERTUC (South East and Eastern Region TUC)
The Arora International Hotels chain wishes to convert the 254-bed Mercure Hotel in Povey Cross Road, Crawley into an Immigration Removal Centre. Due to the nature of the existing building and the site it occupies, it could only be converted into a detention centre to house families and children.
The detention of children in immigration prisons has long been condemned by authorities around the globe for the adverse physical and psychological effects it has on them. In this country these have included the Children's Commissioner for England Sir Alan Aynsley-Green, Refugee and Migrant Justice (formerly the Refugee Legal Centre) and the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee to name but a few.
Just this month (December 2009), the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of General Practitioners and the Faculty of Public Health (and endorsed by the Royal College of Nursing) published a briefing paper entitled 'Significant Harm - the effects of administrative detention on the health of children, young people and their families', which declared that the administrative detention of children is unacceptable and should cease without delay.
Gatwick is already the site of two Immigration Removal Centres, Tinsley House and Brook House, both the source of recent criticism. In particular, Tinsley House is the subject of a highly critical report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Dame Anne Owers, regarding an unannounced short follow-up inspection on 13–15 July 2009, published on 18 December. The report described the arrangements for children at Tinsley House as "wholly unacceptable" and criticised the "prison-like culture" and the "limited access to fresh air" of the children imprisoned there.
We the undersigned call on Arora International Hotels to unconditionally withdraw their application for change of use of Mercure Hotel and, failing that, for Crawley Borough Council to reject the application at the earliest opportunity. Imprisoning children for the 'crime' of being a migrant is totally unacceptable and nobody should encourage others to profit from the activity, whatever the situation.
signatures:
Dr Caroline Lucas - Green Party MEP for SE England
Ben Duncan Brighton and Hove City Councillor, Green Party parliamentary candidate & member of Sussex Police Authority
Tony Greenstein - Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre
Helen M. Hintjens - Senior Lecturer in Development and Social Justice, International Institute of Social Studies, University of Rotterdam
No Borders Brighton
London No Borders
Manchester No Borders
No Borders South Wales
No One Is Illegal
Barbed Wire Britain Network to End Refugee and Migrant Detention
Communities Of Resistance (CoRe)
Fight Racism Fight Imperialism
Detainee Solidarity London
Stop Deportations Network
Kent Refugee Help
Migrant English Project (Brighton)
Long Journey Home
Ethnic Arts Group
Cardiff Refugee & Asylum Seeker Welcome
Cardiff STAR
Cardiff People & Planet
Cardiff University Green Party
SERTUC (South East and Eastern Region TUC)
International Protests In Support Of The Merak Tamils
[Geordie accent] It is day one hundred in the Merak Harbour boat and things are not looking too good for the ship mates...
...no it's not a TV reality show, but it might have been better if it was somehow, as the world would be paying it a bit more attention than it currently appears to be.
Yes, today sees the 100th day since the Jaya Lestari was intercepted by the Indonesian navy, at Australia's request. The boat and its 254 Tamil refugee passengers was then towed into West Javan port of Merak to commence a 3 month plus stand-off with the Indonesian authorities. The Tamils have survived monsoons, typhoons, dysentry, an attempted armed raid and the death of one of their number from complications involving a stomach ulcer. They need international pressure to be put on the Australian Government to take responsibility for the situation and provide shelter for the refugees in accord with international treaties.
The worldwide Tamil community have put out an international call to action to hold protest vigils, such as those already organised across Australia and outside Australian consulates in Auckland, Toronto, Washington, London and Malaysia. The London protest will be held at 4:00 pm today at:
Australian High Commission
Strand,
London
WC2B 4LA
(corner of the Aldwych and the Strand. Nearest Tube station: Temple)
In recent days the Indonesian government have repeated their threats to end the stand-off with a 'gun-point evacuation' and to send all the Tamils back to Sri Lanka, in direct contravention of international treaties against refoulement. The Indonesians swiftly back-tracked when the threat was made public, even though the Tamils themselves have said they will no longer resist such an attempt.
To see the conditions of the Tamil asylum seekers are being forced to live in, follow the link to a CNN video.
...no it's not a TV reality show, but it might have been better if it was somehow, as the world would be paying it a bit more attention than it currently appears to be.
Yes, today sees the 100th day since the Jaya Lestari was intercepted by the Indonesian navy, at Australia's request. The boat and its 254 Tamil refugee passengers was then towed into West Javan port of Merak to commence a 3 month plus stand-off with the Indonesian authorities. The Tamils have survived monsoons, typhoons, dysentry, an attempted armed raid and the death of one of their number from complications involving a stomach ulcer. They need international pressure to be put on the Australian Government to take responsibility for the situation and provide shelter for the refugees in accord with international treaties.
The worldwide Tamil community have put out an international call to action to hold protest vigils, such as those already organised across Australia and outside Australian consulates in Auckland, Toronto, Washington, London and Malaysia. The London protest will be held at 4:00 pm today at:
Australian High Commission
Strand,
London
WC2B 4LA
(corner of the Aldwych and the Strand. Nearest Tube station: Temple)
In recent days the Indonesian government have repeated their threats to end the stand-off with a 'gun-point evacuation' and to send all the Tamils back to Sri Lanka, in direct contravention of international treaties against refoulement. The Indonesians swiftly back-tracked when the threat was made public, even though the Tamils themselves have said they will no longer resist such an attempt.
To see the conditions of the Tamil asylum seekers are being forced to live in, follow the link to a CNN video.
Friday, 15 January 2010
Mercure Hotel Conversion: Protest at Crawley Council Meeting, 25th January
On Monday 25th January No Borders Brighton and London No Borders are calling for a protest outside Crawley Town Hall (The Boulevard, Crawley, West Sussex RH10 1UZ) at 6.30pm to protest against Arora International's plans to turn the four-star Mercure hotel at Gatwick into yet another immigration prison.
Thursday, 14 January 2010
Ku Klux Clan
The front page of the leftist Italian newspaper Il Manifesto sums up the background to the riots in Italy succinctly. In Italy 'clan' refers to a criminal gang, so they are basically saying that the 'Ndrangheta are racists and they provoked the riots in order to induce the police to evacuate the migrants and sort out their problem of having too many foreign fruit pickers in the area for too little work. And they got to save money as well because the migrants left without picking up their wages.
And here is a video of some of the conditions that the fruit pickers were forced to live in. Very reminiscent of Calais.
In a typical denialist fashion, Andrea Ronchi, Italy's European affairs minister, was quick to jump to the defence of his country in the face of severe condemnation of the United Nations, the EU Commission and even the Pope. Here's what he had to say:
"In Italy, there is no racism. It does not exist. It is an accusation made by people who do not know Italy."
"We will give them (those making the accusation) a free tour, at our expense, to show them what there is in Italy: solidarity and welcome. But it is true there is a violent phenomenon - illegal immigration."
"These accusations are the fruit of a left-wing culture no longer in step with citizens. Italy is the most welcoming country in Europe, and anyone accusing us of racism is stupid."
"Italy has been alone on the economic and political front, facing the urgent problem of illegal immigration. I criticise Europe for wasting time in creating a refugees' rights agency."
Condemned by his own mouth.
Rabid Journalism
The Express seems to have gotten too caught up in the fervour of its own xenophobia, so much so that the paper appears, in the guise of Leo McKinstry's article 'Immigrants Squat In Your House And You're Powerless', to be essaying the journalistic equivalent of foaming at the mouth. And like any mad rabid dog, he should really be taken out and shot, the poor thing.
In case you cannot bring yourselves to read the damned thing, here is our precise of the paper's rapidly cooling bile:
Good God! What's the world coming to? Gypos over here stealing our homes (a man's home is his castle, dontcha know?). And those namby pamby police, pussyfooting around, too tied up in Bolshevik red tape to do anything. Calling Mr Mosedale (the owner of the house) a racist too boot, simply because he, as a hard-working tax-paying British citizen, challenged the right of some foreigner right to live in Britain on benefits (they were living on benefits, weren't they?) or something. And then the damned gypos had the audacity to leave before he coud get them in court. Swine.
Absolute bloody disgrace if you ask me. (Cough, cough, splutter, splutter) Where is the iron discipline of a right wing dictatorship or an army coup when you need it?
Footnote: By the way, Marx did not spread the idea that “property is theft”. You are mistaking him for Pierre-Joseph Proudhon who, in the book 'What Is Property?: or, An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government', was in fact referring to capital and private property, and not personal property (things created by one's own labour, the clothes one wears, etc.). Unfortunately, "If the police carry on failing the public" the result will not be anarchy.
In case you cannot bring yourselves to read the damned thing, here is our precise of the paper's rapidly cooling bile:
Good God! What's the world coming to? Gypos over here stealing our homes (a man's home is his castle, dontcha know?). And those namby pamby police, pussyfooting around, too tied up in Bolshevik red tape to do anything. Calling Mr Mosedale (the owner of the house) a racist too boot, simply because he, as a hard-working tax-paying British citizen, challenged the right of some foreigner right to live in Britain on benefits (they were living on benefits, weren't they?) or something. And then the damned gypos had the audacity to leave before he coud get them in court. Swine.
Absolute bloody disgrace if you ask me. (Cough, cough, splutter, splutter) Where is the iron discipline of a right wing dictatorship or an army coup when you need it?
Footnote: By the way, Marx did not spread the idea that “property is theft”. You are mistaking him for Pierre-Joseph Proudhon who, in the book 'What Is Property?: or, An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government', was in fact referring to capital and private property, and not personal property (things created by one's own labour, the clothes one wears, etc.). Unfortunately, "If the police carry on failing the public" the result will not be anarchy.
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
SHOCK HORROR: Daily Mail Gets A Headline 'Right' For Once...
...it's just the rest of the article that is a tissue of lies.
Ian 'Dim' Sparks, co-author of that other tissue of lies 'Calais migrants ambush holiday Britons at knifepoint in terrifying 'highway robberies'',* has just published an article headed 'Bulldozing of Calais Jungle immigration camp was a 'publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public', based on an interview with Vincent Lenoir of the Salam association** carried out by the French weekly news magazine l'Express in an article 'L'emprise des passeurs s'est renforcée sur les migrants' ('The influence of the smugglers on the migrants has increased'). When I say "based on", I mean it in the loosest possible sense of the phrase.
The Mail claims to have extracted a series of M. Lenoir's 'quotes' from the l'Express article, which it then proceeds to use to bash the French with and ultimately M. Lenoir and his humanitarian efforts in supporting the Calais migrants, all to push its own anti-foreigner agenda.
Here are the quotes it claims are from M. Lenoir:
"publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public" (from the headline) and another version of the same thing - [The destruction of the Jungle migrant camp in Calais aimed at stemming the tide of illegal immigration to the UK was a publicity stunt to] "placate the British public";
[The operation to bulldoze the squalid woodland camp was branded a] "total failure";
"Our immigration minister Eric Besson's claim that destroying the Jungle would solve the problem is false";
"Nicolas Sarkozy made the same claim when as interior minister he closed down Sangatte in 2002, and promised we'd never have migrants on the Channel coast again";
"We estimate there are around 400 migrants in Calais";
"But other camps are also springing up elsewhere, even in Belgium";
"And more seriously, the people smuggling gangs are back too, when Mr Besson had claimed his policy would put a halt to their activities";
"The only purpose of the Jungle operation was to appease the public in England. It was an Anglo-French publicity stunt that had no effect at all."
And for good measure, they threw in: Mr Lenoir's claims come as Calais residents are becoming increasingly frustrated at the French government's lack of action to take their town's migrant problem.
And here is our translation of the article, see if you can find where the Mail's quotes come from?
England remains their dream. The foreigners in irregular situation have come back around Calais, 4 months after the evacuation of their settlements by the police. The response of Vincent Lenoir, association Salam.
Salam helps illegal migrants in the form of distribution of food or medicines. On September 22, 2009, a vast police operation ended in the closure of the "jungle", the place of concentration near Calais of these people waiting for passage to England. "The problem is solved," said Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration and National Identity in Le Parisien, 12 January. Fabrication (fantasy) replied Vincent Lenoir.
How many migrants today wait in Calais for passage to England?
We estimate there are about 400. We distribute a little more than 320 meals, but we know that all do not come to stock up with us. One year ago, we counted 600 migrants. During the summer of 2009 a peak at 1,400 was recorded. But the Minister Eric Besson chooses the figures today which suit him. I know the night of the police intervention in the "jungle", we served 200 meals, and the next day onwards we have been seeing newcomers. The migrants want at all costs to get to England, a police operation will not be sufficient to discourage them.
Are the places where they gather the same as before?
Calais remains the main place. But it is true that we have seen more and more small settlements that nobody knows about. I have an example: we just discovered between Calais and Boulogne, about twenty kilometres away, a new place almost by accident. A dispute between residents there provoked the intervention of gendarmes. Belgium is in turn affected. The worst? The influence of smugglers has increased amongst the migrants. Yet the minister assured us that his action would make the situation worse for them.
What do you think was the real meaning of the operation?
In my opinion it was primarily intended for the British public opinion. It was a kind of communication operation outsourced to France by England. Three British channels also broadcast live the police action September 22, 2009 with support from helicopters! The Governments staged a display of their firmness. In 2002, Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy had done the same thing in Sangatte (Pas-de-Calais) and we had promised never to hear about it again! [i.e. it would be the end of the situation]
Your humanitarian work, is it more difficult to conduct?
No. We have agreements with the city of Calais and the region. They have improved the reception conditions. So a building was built where we distribute food. The place is also accommodation in case of severe cold.
So, let's have a quick look at the Mail's rather slack translation.
"Publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public" - clearly a very rough paraphrase. Yes, he did say that it was aimed at British public opinion but the words (in French of course) for 'stunt' and 'placating' did not pass his lips, and we shall be asking him to confirm this.
"Total failure" - nowhere to be seen.
"Our immigration minister Eric Besson's claim that destroying the Jungle would solve the problem is false" - a very free rendering of ""The problem is solved," said Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration and National Identity in Le Parisien, 12 January. Fabrication (fantasy) replied Vincent Lenoir."
"Nicolas Sarkozy made the same claim when as interior minister he closed down Sangatte in 2002, and promised we'd never have migrants on the Channel coast again" - not too many liberties taken there.
"We estimate there are around 400 migrants in Calais" - short of adding an extra zero, not even Spark could get that wrong.
"But other camps are also springing up elsewhere, even in Belgium" - yes Lenoir mentions Belgium and the fact that they "have seen more and more small settlements that nobody knows about", including one "we just discovered between Calais and Boulogne", but "camps ... springing up elsewhere" is pure invention. This is the translation of a magazine article not a piece of prose poetry!
"And more seriously, the people smuggling gangs are back too, when Mr Besson had claimed his policy would put a halt to their activities" - very inventive translation this one: "The worst? The influence of smugglers has increased amongst the migrants. Yet the minister assured us that his action would make the situation worse for them." He didn't sat "put a halt" to the smugglers and he never said or implied that the smugglers had gone away. You can't have it both ways Sparky, if the clearance of the 'Jungle' drove the traffickers away, then that's one up for Besson. If he didn't, then they can hardly have come back.
"The only purpose of the Jungle operation was to appease the public in England. It was an Anglo-French publicity stunt that had no effect at all." - What he actually said (allowing for our poor translation: "In my opinion it was primarily intended for the British public opinion. It was a kind of communication operation outsourced to France by England." Nowhere doe Lenoir say that the destruction of the 'Jungle' had no effect what so ever. To argue that is a gross distortion of what he said.
And the last bit about: "Mr Lenoir's claims come as Calais residents are becoming increasingly frustrated at the French government's lack of action to take their town's migrant problem." Spark must be even more rabid than we have always taken him to be to come away from having read the l'Express article and thought that that was what Lenoir was arguing. Vincent as a representative of the Calaisiens, in answer to the question "Your humanitarian work, is it more difficult to conduct (since the clearance of the 'Jungle')?" has one word to say. "Non!"
D- This is a very poor attempt at your French homework Spark. You really should be doing much better by now and I am seriously thinking of not letting you sit your 'O' Level at the end of the year. Have you thought about switching to the creative writing course?
* NB This article was first published on 21 July (see) but was the subject of a complaint (along with a large number of other Mail articles) on the paper's coverage of Calais. The paper had to publish a 'clarification' ( see foot of the article).
** One of the organisations that provides humanitarian aid to the migrants in Calais.
Ian 'Dim' Sparks, co-author of that other tissue of lies 'Calais migrants ambush holiday Britons at knifepoint in terrifying 'highway robberies'',* has just published an article headed 'Bulldozing of Calais Jungle immigration camp was a 'publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public', based on an interview with Vincent Lenoir of the Salam association** carried out by the French weekly news magazine l'Express in an article 'L'emprise des passeurs s'est renforcée sur les migrants' ('The influence of the smugglers on the migrants has increased'). When I say "based on", I mean it in the loosest possible sense of the phrase.
The Mail claims to have extracted a series of M. Lenoir's 'quotes' from the l'Express article, which it then proceeds to use to bash the French with and ultimately M. Lenoir and his humanitarian efforts in supporting the Calais migrants, all to push its own anti-foreigner agenda.
Here are the quotes it claims are from M. Lenoir:
"publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public" (from the headline) and another version of the same thing - [The destruction of the Jungle migrant camp in Calais aimed at stemming the tide of illegal immigration to the UK was a publicity stunt to] "placate the British public";
[The operation to bulldoze the squalid woodland camp was branded a] "total failure";
"Our immigration minister Eric Besson's claim that destroying the Jungle would solve the problem is false";
"Nicolas Sarkozy made the same claim when as interior minister he closed down Sangatte in 2002, and promised we'd never have migrants on the Channel coast again";
"We estimate there are around 400 migrants in Calais";
"But other camps are also springing up elsewhere, even in Belgium";
"And more seriously, the people smuggling gangs are back too, when Mr Besson had claimed his policy would put a halt to their activities";
"The only purpose of the Jungle operation was to appease the public in England. It was an Anglo-French publicity stunt that had no effect at all."
And for good measure, they threw in: Mr Lenoir's claims come as Calais residents are becoming increasingly frustrated at the French government's lack of action to take their town's migrant problem.
And here is our translation of the article, see if you can find where the Mail's quotes come from?
England remains their dream. The foreigners in irregular situation have come back around Calais, 4 months after the evacuation of their settlements by the police. The response of Vincent Lenoir, association Salam.
Salam helps illegal migrants in the form of distribution of food or medicines. On September 22, 2009, a vast police operation ended in the closure of the "jungle", the place of concentration near Calais of these people waiting for passage to England. "The problem is solved," said Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration and National Identity in Le Parisien, 12 January. Fabrication (fantasy) replied Vincent Lenoir.
How many migrants today wait in Calais for passage to England?
We estimate there are about 400. We distribute a little more than 320 meals, but we know that all do not come to stock up with us. One year ago, we counted 600 migrants. During the summer of 2009 a peak at 1,400 was recorded. But the Minister Eric Besson chooses the figures today which suit him. I know the night of the police intervention in the "jungle", we served 200 meals, and the next day onwards we have been seeing newcomers. The migrants want at all costs to get to England, a police operation will not be sufficient to discourage them.
Are the places where they gather the same as before?
Calais remains the main place. But it is true that we have seen more and more small settlements that nobody knows about. I have an example: we just discovered between Calais and Boulogne, about twenty kilometres away, a new place almost by accident. A dispute between residents there provoked the intervention of gendarmes. Belgium is in turn affected. The worst? The influence of smugglers has increased amongst the migrants. Yet the minister assured us that his action would make the situation worse for them.
What do you think was the real meaning of the operation?
In my opinion it was primarily intended for the British public opinion. It was a kind of communication operation outsourced to France by England. Three British channels also broadcast live the police action September 22, 2009 with support from helicopters! The Governments staged a display of their firmness. In 2002, Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy had done the same thing in Sangatte (Pas-de-Calais) and we had promised never to hear about it again! [i.e. it would be the end of the situation]
Your humanitarian work, is it more difficult to conduct?
No. We have agreements with the city of Calais and the region. They have improved the reception conditions. So a building was built where we distribute food. The place is also accommodation in case of severe cold.
So, let's have a quick look at the Mail's rather slack translation.
"Publicity stunt aimed at placating the British public" - clearly a very rough paraphrase. Yes, he did say that it was aimed at British public opinion but the words (in French of course) for 'stunt' and 'placating' did not pass his lips, and we shall be asking him to confirm this.
"Total failure" - nowhere to be seen.
"Our immigration minister Eric Besson's claim that destroying the Jungle would solve the problem is false" - a very free rendering of ""The problem is solved," said Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration and National Identity in Le Parisien, 12 January. Fabrication (fantasy) replied Vincent Lenoir."
"Nicolas Sarkozy made the same claim when as interior minister he closed down Sangatte in 2002, and promised we'd never have migrants on the Channel coast again" - not too many liberties taken there.
"We estimate there are around 400 migrants in Calais" - short of adding an extra zero, not even Spark could get that wrong.
"But other camps are also springing up elsewhere, even in Belgium" - yes Lenoir mentions Belgium and the fact that they "have seen more and more small settlements that nobody knows about", including one "we just discovered between Calais and Boulogne", but "camps ... springing up elsewhere" is pure invention. This is the translation of a magazine article not a piece of prose poetry!
"And more seriously, the people smuggling gangs are back too, when Mr Besson had claimed his policy would put a halt to their activities" - very inventive translation this one: "The worst? The influence of smugglers has increased amongst the migrants. Yet the minister assured us that his action would make the situation worse for them." He didn't sat "put a halt" to the smugglers and he never said or implied that the smugglers had gone away. You can't have it both ways Sparky, if the clearance of the 'Jungle' drove the traffickers away, then that's one up for Besson. If he didn't, then they can hardly have come back.
"The only purpose of the Jungle operation was to appease the public in England. It was an Anglo-French publicity stunt that had no effect at all." - What he actually said (allowing for our poor translation: "In my opinion it was primarily intended for the British public opinion. It was a kind of communication operation outsourced to France by England." Nowhere doe Lenoir say that the destruction of the 'Jungle' had no effect what so ever. To argue that is a gross distortion of what he said.
And the last bit about: "Mr Lenoir's claims come as Calais residents are becoming increasingly frustrated at the French government's lack of action to take their town's migrant problem." Spark must be even more rabid than we have always taken him to be to come away from having read the l'Express article and thought that that was what Lenoir was arguing. Vincent as a representative of the Calaisiens, in answer to the question "Your humanitarian work, is it more difficult to conduct (since the clearance of the 'Jungle')?" has one word to say. "Non!"
D- This is a very poor attempt at your French homework Spark. You really should be doing much better by now and I am seriously thinking of not letting you sit your 'O' Level at the end of the year. Have you thought about switching to the creative writing course?
* NB This article was first published on 21 July (see) but was the subject of a complaint (along with a large number of other Mail articles) on the paper's coverage of Calais. The paper had to publish a 'clarification' ( see foot of the article).
** One of the organisations that provides humanitarian aid to the migrants in Calais.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)