Report comment

People crossing the channel had an opportunity to claim asylum in France or in any other EU country they crossed to get to France.

There is no reason why they should be allowed to demand the right to forum shop for the country that gives them the best deal.

Our present role as the honeypot for anyone who can make it here through France is causing trouble and expense for France. It is an unfriendly act for which there is no necessity.

There is, we are frequently told nothing wrong with the EU and that leaving it was a black day for Britain. They did not need to come here. They could have applied there.

After all the “EU is one of the greatest human achievements, says Welby — and that’s the truth” (Church Times, June 5, 2018) I am sure it’s even better now than it was then.

So we should not be embarrassed to refuse an asylum application by any individual who could have applied for asylum in one or more safe countries crossed before arrival. Parking them somewhere safe while they secure asylum should be the most we and the EU should do. There is a case for joining a scheme with EU countries to share in the allocation of successful claimants – claims being processed centrally on the continent.

But perhaps not in Germany - reported last year to be thinking of Rwanda. Or perhaps it was not the Rwanda we were going to use?

Several years ago the Guardian published article saying how barbaric it would be to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. In the same issue it ran an advertisement for Rwanda as an ideal holiday destination.

Perhaps the Germans are looking at the “ideal” Rwanda?