Migrant analysis

Carolyn Taylor (Letters, 24 June) berates Clark Cross for the use of anecdotal evidence to support his argument that many of the illegal immigrants are ne’er do wells and then goes on to make a number of unsubstantiated assertions in support of her point of view.

While I respect that Ms Taylor’s view is that those arriving in Europe illegally are deserving of all the help they can get and have done nothing to precipitate the plight they find themselves in, I have seen little impartial analysis concerning their origins, motives, sense of social responsibility or the conditions they have left behind.

We need also to distinguish between those leaving war zones and economic migrants.

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

I assume from her comments about Libyan street corners and slave labour that Ms Taylor has first-hand knowledge of the situation in Libya; if so she should say so, if not she appears to be using anecdotal evidence to support her argument.

As I have commented in previous letters, the UK has desperate people of its own, stretched social capital and the settled will of the population, judging by voting patterns in May 2015, appears to be that immigration should be on the UK’s terms and not on the terms imposed by those who arrive with no documentation and who throw themselves at the mercy of the authorities.

Benedict Bate

South Clerk Street