SIR – Over the weekend I watched with interest the Conservative MP for Dover, Natalie Elphicke, arguing that all the options for dealing with the dramatic increase in the number of “illegal migrants” crossing the Channel should be explored.

Unfortunately, she did not state what those options were, however,  she did state that the French should be doing far more to help. Other than, “it was a French problem as well” she offered no argument to support that view. 

From afar I can see absolutely no incentive whatsoever for the French to do more since it is quite clear that having made their way across Europe to the Channel Ports it is obvious that the immigrants concerned are all intent on getting to Britain rather than wanting to remain in either France or any other European country they have passed through.

Given this reality I find it difficult to construe this to be a French problem.

Certainly, in the case of those Iraqis attempting the crossing on Saturday one has to ask the question were they doing it because Britain joined the US in an illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 to overthrow the otherwise stable Saddam regime resulting in the ongoing violence and economic chaos still existing in the country today?

Priti Patel please note,  it seems to me that there are only three options available to the British Government.

The first is to work with other Countries to solve the problem at source by resolving the issues that drives other humans to seek dramatic solutions to the problems affecting themselves and their families.

Secondly, to increase the risks of crossing the Channel, probably breaching International and/or Maritime Law in doing so, to such a level that people stop taking the risk at all.

Thirdly, to accept the reality of the situation and provide the resources, particularly to Kent County Council, who are facing the biggest burden of this ongoing problem.

Mike Levins