UKC

Hello. I'm looking for advice please.

After the refugee camp at Calais was shut last year, many refugees are now moving about the area or other parts of France sleeping rough. If they attempt to pitch tents they are moved along by the police and the tents confiscated. A bivvy bag would offer protection from the elements and be less conspicuous.

I was wandering what would be the cheapest option for a bivvy bag which would hold up to repeated usage? I thought this might work

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Adventure-Medical-Heatsheets-Emergency-Bivvy/dp/B0...

but the issue with this and any other emergency solution is breathability and possibly durability. I was just wandering what people thought the options might be?

Thank you for any help

In reply to LBrown:

Ex army bags might be more durable, and less bright. Not as cheap.

In reply to marsbar:

ex armybags would also be more breathable...

In reply to LBrown:

If you're looking to help out, I'd recommend contacting one of the various groups working with refugees -- they're going to know what their greatest need at the moment is, which might or might not be something like bivvy bags.

In reply to LBrown:

I paid less than a tenner for my Belgian army issue gortex B.bag (it was grade 1 surplus but was like new, only had shelving marks (and the funky smell all mil-surp gear has lol )), the Belgian bags are designed so that your whole bed roll lives in it and the whole lot is rolled up and tied off with the attached straps to keep it dry as they are then strapped to the outside of the rucksack for transport.

Very spacious and due to the design have a large flap that covers your head.

If you want quite a few dont bother buying from ebay unless you can get a decent discount from the seller, look to the wholesalers, their prices are a lot cheaper if you are buying a lot of units (can sometimes get them to pick through and dig out the best quality ones too )

In reply to LBrown:



>. A bivvy bag would offer protection from the elements and be less conspicuous.

So you are going to send some bivvy bags over in order to help these potentially unregistered illegal immigrants avoid the authorities?

Can't help I'm afraid, but I've got some spare hacksaw blades if you want to bake some cakes for prison inmates?

In reply to Dell:


Are you familiar with the concept of "refugees"?

Even if you think some of them are the famous "economic migrants", who've been lured over by the cushy life of the Calais Jungle and the chance to suffocate hideously in a van or drown trying to get to the UK, it seems hard to dispute that a huge number of them are fleeing from countries like Syria.

What makes you think "yes, these refugees who have fled from civil war so as not to be massacred deserve not only to have to sleep rough, but also to have the police steal their property so as to maximize the chances that they'll die of hypothermia"?

In reply to Dell:
Callous. You appear to lack both compassion, and perspective.

I hope you never end up vulnerable and in need of help. But maybe if you do, you might readjust your unfair and overly entitled views.

Luke

In reply to OP, I'd second the suggestion of ex-mil kit. However as also mentioned it may be helpful to contact charities on the ground first, to see where your money may be best spent.

Edited to add, dislikers feel free to explain yourselves.

In reply to slab_happy:


They could've gone anywhere, they could be in Spain, Greece, somewhere warm, but no they chose to go somewhere cold.

In reply to slab_happy:

If only there was some mechanism where they could register as an asylum seeker or refugee with the French authorities and receive food, medical care and accomodation...

Edit:

As noted up the thread you might be better contacting one of the major charities. The bag you linked to looks maybe suitable for single use in an emergency.

In reply to Dell:

Ah another nasty git on here, lovely. Yes, you.

In reply to JayPee630:


Not really, I'm quite the liberal. But I don't see how sending 'inconspicuous' bivvy bags so they can avoid the authorities is really doing them much good.

If they are a genuine refugee then they can register as such and receive help.

If they are fleeing the war in Syria, then they will have effectively done so the moment they step out of Syria. Where they go after that is their own choice. They didn't just step into a random teleporter that beamed them into Calais.

If they are allowed to pitch up a tent wherever they want to, then we will just see another 'jungle' built. The French put a lot of money and resources into clearing the last one, why would they let another one happen?

The OP described it as a refugee camp. It wasn't an official refugee camp set up by a government or charity, and in any case, refugee camps are supposed to be temporary, this one had been getting out of hand and it was causing problems, which is why it was dismantled and systems were put in place to process the refugees. (Most of which are not genuine refugees)

In reply to Ridge:


Yes, that would save the poor souls in the UK from the anguish of being concerned about the plight of refugees in other parts of our continent. Must be a terrible burden trying to maintain the illusion that the UK is hard done by, while receiving a fraction of the asylum seekers they get in France and approving a fraction of those.

In reply to john arran:

But France is massive.

In reply to Dell:

Ah yes, so it is. Well now that you've identified a plausibly credible reason for maintaining your isolationist agenda I expect you'll be feeling good about yourself. Have a nice cup of tea and forget all about it. Hopefully the 'problem' might go away. After all, it's only people in need anyway - nothing to do with you.

edit: ... and 'disliking' it won't make it go away either, though it also might help you feel better.

In reply to Dell:


This seems like a remarkably optimistic view, and one which is not exactly supported by reports on the asylum system in France (it's certainly not true of the system in the UK).


And your basis for this claim is ...?

I would actually agree with you that bivvy bags are not remotely a fix for the situation, and I advised consulting groups working with refugees because they'll know what they actually need most (and bivvy bags might or might not be something they want or think would be helpful).

However, I object to your idea that trying to do something for refugees is somehow morally equivalent to helping criminals break out of prison!

In reply to slab_happy:




One of the top blokes in the EU said it.

https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees/

...and if you think about it... as a refugee, once you leave the first 'safe' country you reach...to continue travelling to try and reach another 'safe' country because of a perceived economic benefit in doing so, don't you then become an economic migrant instead/also?


Yes, I admit my analogy was overstepping the mark a little bit. Perhaps it's the equivalent to hiding a criminal to keep them out of prison?

In reply to slab_happy:

Well said and shame on the people downvoting you.

In reply to Dell:



https://euobserver.com/migration/132048

In reply to Mr Lopez:

"Frontex says 39 percent of all migrants arriving in Greece in December declared they were from Syria"

If you were an economic migrant trying to claim refugee status, where would you 'declare' you were from?

In reply to john arran:
The Dublin accord means you can only register once in the EU as a refugee and they like the UK. So they don't want to apply in France. But not worries, with Brexit, that Dublin accord might end up in the bin and they can register in France and then also try the UK! Or vise versa!


Serieus note; lets keep things about climbing as such and not as much about politics?

In reply to Dell:


Yes, god forbid that refugees should try to travel to another country because they have relatives there, or because they think they'll have a better chance of getting a job (and contributing to the economy) there, or because the "safe" country they've reached keeps refugees in camps where they're attacked by far-right terrorists with Molotov cocktails, or forced to sleep in tents in the freezing cold.


Being a refugee is not a crime. Even being an "unregistered" refugee is not a crime.

In reply to Dell:



"Leggeri said they arrived at their data by authenticating the individual backgrounds of the nationals. "

Out of interest, do you think there's *not* a Syrian refugee crisis with millions of people fleeing from Syria in order to survive?

If you think refugees are all or mostly "economic migrants" who are just pretending to be Syrian, where do you think the real Syrians (and Afghans and Iraqis) are all disappearing to?

I'm sure there are false claims, because humans are like that (though it should be noted that "economic migrants" are usually people who are trying to escape from desperate poverty and provide a better life for themselves and their families -- even if you don't want to let them in, they don't deserve to be treated as subhuman either).

But the evidence seems pretty clear that the vast majority of people claiming to be refugees are, in fact, refugees.

In reply to Dell:


Definitely not from Syria, since asylum seekers are not allowed to work and if they have no means of supporting themselves in the form of family or friend's handouts they may get asylum support for the princely sum of £5 a day.

Claiming refugee status would probably not be a part of my economic plan to richness and fortunes tbh.

But if that wasn't a personal question about myself and it was more in general referring to the 90% of refugees who are reported as coming from conflict torn countries, you could have just read the article.

"Leggeri said they arrived at their data by authenticating the individual backgrounds of the nationals.

Some may claim to be Syrian but are not, he said.

If the individual is not Syrian then Frontex assumes the person is an irregular migrant, unless a background check has been performed.

"When a person is not Syrian but, for instance, from Morocco, then we assume unless there is [a reason from their] individual background, that this person is not in need of protection," he said.<i/>

In reply to Dell:

Gah! Just dawned on me this is the gear forum... Take it to the Pub section Dell, this is way off-topic

In reply to slab_happy:


Despite fear of derailing the thread, I can't let this pass.

Yes, the refugee voyage is perilous. Around 1% die enroute it seems. But the voyage to Europe is for most (i.e the residents of Somalia, Afghanistan and Syria, who make up almost 60% of refugees) a choice. Ethiopia, Pakistan, Turkey, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan are their first ports of call, with Saudi Arabia being a willing and active integrator of large numbers it receives.

All that aside, spend time in the developing world and you will see perilous journies, perilous living arrangements, and perilous practices undertaken every second of every day. While no doubt a cause of outrage and fury if occurring in the leafy suburbs of the UK, here they are considered normal and to even attempt to change these behaviors is often seen as unwelcome interference. Overtake on a blind corner at night? Operate that heavy machinery in flip-flops? Let your kids play in heavy traffic, go out on to the river, drunk and in a leaky boat? Increase your chances of dieing a hundred-fold over what it would be in Leamington Spa? Yeah, why not? What to you may look like a migration of extreme danger, would be for many a trip undertaken be they at war or at peace. The Med and refugee routes simply offer a new route and ones made more attractive by the apparent welcome on offer.

In short, the story is sad. But to consider people in some way heartless because they don't buy the narrative plumped in favour of refugees on the streets of UK cities is pretty misguided. It shows a naivety to what are normal living conditions for anywhere between 3 and 5 billion of the world's inhabitants (those living on less than $2.5 a day and $10 a day respectively).

The ones on the streets of Europe, relative to them, are the lucky ones. They were able enough to afford a journey to a place of "economic advantage" rather than merely safety, or at least access credit for such a journey, and likely speak enough of a European language already to have singled themselves out as particularly skilled or qualified. All of that is well beyond the reach of the most needy.

Why exactly are they living on streets here again? Why were they in Calais? What makes it so that their application through normal refugee qualifying criteria doesn't apply?

In reply to LBrown:

Of interest to this thread.... I visited relations in Germany over xmas. In Germany every town or village is given a number of asylum seekers they have to house. Their government pays them to do so, many have built 'portacabin hotels' where suitable accommodation doesn't exist. My mother-in-law volunteers as someone who helps the asylum seekers fill in all the forms they have to do as part of the asylum process. She mainly works with 'Syrians' and I've found out some stuff about 4-5 of them. They left Syria for the following reasons*:-
2 had finished university and were due for national service so left to avoid that.
1 had become involved with a girl he shouldn't have and 'will be killed by her family' if he returns.
1 had been kidnapped and ransomed to extort money from his wealthy father (or maybe it was his brother, I heard that second/third hand) and had fled to stop it happening again.
Half of them had asylum-seeking friends / brothers in other parts of Germany.
One was from Aleppo, the others were from Damascus and other places.
None of them wanted to work, they all wanted to study (higher education is free in Germany).
2 of them spoke reasonable English, certainly enough to get by in the UK.
None of them spoke German when they arrived in Germany.
They were all muslim, but varied in the degree of religiousness - one would pray and fast devoutly but the others less so.
They get accommodated, a free train pass for the whole country, and some 'pocket money' from the government.
They're not allowed to work whilst waiting to be processed (but no doubt some do some 'cash in hand' stuff).
Syrians, Eritreans & Afghans were the nationalities in my in-laws' village. Syrians and Eritreans apparently succeed in claiming asylum, Afghans are sent home as their country is safe enough.
The majority of people in the village want nothing to do with the asylum seekers, and the asylum seekers tend to keep themselves to themselves.
* That's what they told us, we have no way of proving their stories.
Hope that helps. They seemed like reasonable people, but its difficult to tell with the language barrier.

In reply to slab_happy:

I asked because someone from a group working with refugees ask me what I thought and I couldn't give them advice on what I thought would be best for their needs, those being different from I would consider for my own use.

Thank you for any suggestion. The ex military kit sounds like a good idea.

I'm going to keep my head down on anything else in this thread.

In reply to tjin:


Except that nearly twice as many people claim asylum in France as do in the UK, so to focus on these particular "they", i.e. those camped out in Calais, is to talk about a self-selecting and distinctly unrepresentative minority. For the most part it seems that "they" do indeed claim asylum once reaching France. Yes of course you can still argue that every single asylum seeker should claim asylum before making it to their intended destination of doing so, but without an effective agreement of migrant dispersal between European states that would (and does) put an unfair burden on those countries that are easiest to reach.

In reply to Dell:


It's what Dublin II says -the regs in EU- but not what international law says. As a signatory to the relevant Geneva Convention, we should be observing the latter.