A (3:39)

So what are the major push and pull factors at work in this situation?

B (3:45)

Well, again, it is difficult to get precise information about the individuals who are living in Kele by virtue of their situations, but voluntary sector organizations operating in the area have suggested that many of these individuals are coming from countries such as Eritrea, Sudan and Afghanistan. So in other words, many of these individuals are coming from countries with well documented violations of human rights as well as conflict and instability. Regarding pull factors, there have been suggestions that some individuals may be attempting to reach the UK because they have relatives here or because they already speak English. There are also suggestions that perhaps differences in the implementation of asylum procedures in UK and France could be contributing to the situation as well as for example, the Home Office suggests that most asylum applications will receive a response within six months. Conversely, in France it can take several months simply just to register a claim for asylum, and voluntary sector organizations have reported that in 2014 it took an average of 15 months to receive a decision on asylum claims. That said, I think it is important to remember just in general, that customary and international law does provide individuals with the right to leave their countries of origin in search of asylum in other countries, and stipulates that governments should not penalize individuals for entering a country of refuge without authorization. In addition, governments do have a de facto obligation to assess all asylum applications that they receive in order to ensure that they don't return an individual to a country where they could face pressure persecution. It's also worth noting that the UK does receive fewer asylum applications than most other large EU member states. For example, in 2014 the UK received approximately 5% of all new asylum applications in the European Union, which is the equivalent of approximately 500 applications for every 1 million British residents. By by comparison, France received roughly 1,000 applications for every 1 million residents in France, and Germany received 2,400 applications approximately for every 1 million Germans. It's also worth noting that Turkey, Pakistan and Lebanon are the top three host countries for refugees in the world. So, although asylum flows can certainly be unpredictable, and while they may create pressures for local authorities, it is important to ensure that refugees and asylum seekers can exercise their rights and also to maintain a sense of perspective about the global refugee situation.

A (6:39)

So what's the situation more broadly across Europe? What's the wider context?

B (6:46)

Well, it seems as though we're witnessing two different dynamics in migration policy making in Europe at the moment. On the one hand, at the national level, in some countries there seems to be a desire to pursue a more restrictive approach to migration, whereas at the EU level, in some areas we are seeing a desire to perhaps be a bit more accommodating, certainly in recognition of the pressures in Southeastern Europe, south and Eastern Europe rather, and the increased flows across the Mediterranean. So, for example, at the national level, the UK has recently implemented substantive cuts to financial support for asylum seekers. And in Denmark, the recently elected Venstre government has announced plans to introduce similar measures next month and has also proposed to reintroduce checks along its border with Germany. In Hungary and Bulgaria, for example, we've also seen measures to reduce the flow of asylum seekers across their territories by building fences along their borders with Serbia and Turkey, respectively. Conversely, at the EU level, the European Union has recently implemented reforms as part of its efforts, ongoing efforts to develop a common European asylum system. These reforms in particular address issues related to the processing of asylum claims as well as reception conditions for asylum seekers. Now, if these revised directives are implemented as intended, we could see a shift towards a more expeditious asylum system that also better respects the dignity of asylum seekers and provides safeguards for vulnerable individuals. However, it could be several years before we start to see meaningful changes in reception conditions for asylum seekers, given that some provisions of the revised directives enter into effect until 2018. Moreover, the fact that the UK, Ireland and Denmark are not bound by the revised directives, and in light of the increased flows across the Mediterranean, there are certainly questions as to whether these reforms in particular will genuinely help the EU develop a more coherent asylum system. It is also worth noting, of course, that the EU is cognizant of the pressures and flows across the Mediterranean and has endeavored to respond by engaging in more responsibility sharing through the introduction of not only a relocation program for asylum seekers, but also a resettlement program for refugees outside the European Union. To date, most member states, excluding the UK and Denmark, have pledged to relocate more than 30,000 asylum seekers from from Italy and Greece. And in addition, we've seen commitments to resettle more than 18,000 refugees over the next two years. Now, the indications are that this resettlement will occur within existing quotas rather than being in addition to current commitments. But this is still an important step given that collectively, European countries resettle far fewer refugees than other countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia.

A (10:09)

So what are the possible options for resolution to the situation?

B (10:14)

Well, at the moment, it seems that the UK's approach has been to securitize the situation. And we see this not only through phrases such as a swarm of people, but also the use of measures, as I mentioned earlier, related to providing additional fencing and and dispatching UK border force teams. In terms of solutions, the UK and France could consider sharing responsibility for assessing the asylum claims of any individuals who wish to make such claims in Calais. At the moment, there is some precedent for this approach. In 2002, before the Sangat camp was closed, the UK and France did reach a compromise solution in which the British government agreed to provide temporary protection to approximately 1,000 Iraqis who were living in Calais and also offered family reunification to roughly 200 Afghans who had relatives here, while the French government, of course, agreed to assess the remaining asylum claims. In addition, that still leaves the question of the current reception conditions for forced migrants in Calais. And the French government has applied for funding, emergency funding, from the European Union in order to support the construction of the accommodation center I mentioned earlier for women and children. And so the provision of additional emergency funding could help ensure that there are adequate reception conditions for all forced migrants in Calais at the moment. But there is also a possibility that civil society could play a role in this area. For example, in Germany, we've seen a number of cases recently where individuals have voluntarily opened their homes to asylum seekers to ensure that these individuals have a safe place to live while they're awaiting a decision on their asylum claims. And of course, this isn't something that the government can mandate, and it doesn't absolve the government of their legal responsibilities. But if there is a desire among individuals or voluntary sector organizations, then this form of domestic responsibility sharing could theoretically increase reception capacity while asylum seekers are awaiting for their claims to be processed.

A (12:35)

Great. Thank you very much, Laura. You're welcome. Thank you for having me.

B (12:38)

Thanks.