I'm willing to bet that this is still the situation in a decade, because there really aren't any other approaches that aren't horrific. There's no sign that Labour understand this or have any plan for improving it.
So then why are they so keen to get to the UK from France?
I suspect because it is easier to work illegally here as the authorities have no interest in preventing it - having lots of people working at below minimum wage keeps inflation down.
Well some are trying to reach the UK, not all. As to why that is, I don't think any of us on HN can confidently state the reason - none of us have surveyed them all and processed the answers. They may be living in poor conditions and (incorrectly) assume the UK is somehow a more welcoming, tolerant place. They may have family, friends or connections in the UK, or they may simply speak English and have some kind of cultural closeness with the country that they don't have with France. However you're showing a bit more about yourself than you might realise, by assuming that they're purely doing it to work illegally.
It should go without saying that moving anywhere is stressful and not something you take lightly. Even if you're comfortable and well off it's not a walk in the park. Those who are crossing the English Channel in boats aren't doing so because they're after an easy life, and god knows they won't get one when they arrive. They've often endured hardships most of us can barely conceive of, and to do all that simply to live outside the system and work illegally? I find it hard to believe.
There is one problem in that data. It classifies people by country of birth. Because something like (IIRC) 10% of British citizens live abroad a lot of people who are "British citizens by descent", like my younger daughter, were born abroad. She actually spent more of her childhood in the UK than my older daughter who is "British born".
The Migration Observatory is a great source of data. There is a fascinating one on racial discrimination - lots of unexpected results.
See what you need to do if you want to refute something I said is actually go through each point and refute it. Not dump a link and declare checkmate. Either do that or go away.
Thats exactly what i did.
Posted a well researched article by a reasonably well respected educational establishment that disproved every point you tried to make.
Might I suggest you actually read articles like that instead of wandering around claiming no one can be sure of anything then shouting at me to leave my thread when I call you out on obviously never having researched anything you were talking about.
This isnt kindergaten any more, mommy isnt going to read the books to you.
And France does a basic sanity check of any application and rejects it after a day or two.
e.g. pretty sure they are supposed to apply in the first "safe country" they arrive in, everyone who doesn't can just be rejected.
whereas the UK gives them everything indefinately for years.
That's intentional policy, everything else is just a distraction to keep the yokels mostly satiated. No one with more than a double digit IQ could believe sending a few hundred of them at random to Rwanda would be a more effective policy to stop it over just rejecting 99.9999% of applications quickly and efficiently.
France gives them nothing, which is why they are sat in shanty towns waiting for the boats to bring them accross the channel.
They say they dont want them for the normal people, while doing everything they can to make them want to come. the entire system is corrupt and broken
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption
bright side - people mostly now see it, and they will be eradicated from the UK political landscape in just a few days.
It will unfortunately take at least a generation to rebuild though.