The National view: Cameron must stop fuelling suspicion and join EU solution to refugee crisis

The British figure was around half of the French total and a sixth of that in Germany. British politicians may be panicking about the desperate refugees trying to get through the Channel Tunnel but the truth is that Europe’s reaction to the global problem of displaced people has been poor and the British reaction worse than that.

There is no easy solution to the fact that hundreds of thousands of people all over the world are living in such misery, and in many cases such peril, that they feel they have no alternative but to leave their own country and seek sanctuary elsewhere.

But it cannot be an appropriate response simply to build higher fences, to tighten security and to use intemperate language such as “swarm’’ rather than to engage in finding some way to help.

There is no evidence to suggest that this situation will ease in the near future. The British response is not simply immoral –it will not work in the long-term. Those thousands in the camp at Calais, and in other camps across the continent, may be living in dire conditions but their lives are better than those they left behind. Their determination to make their way to other countries, including the UK, will not be diminished by more fences.

That doesn’t mean there is no alternative but to throw open borders to accommodate all who want to come. However, it does mean that Europe has a duty to put together a sensible and fair plan to help those in such desperate need.

And it certainly means that Britain should agree to accept its fair share of refugees rather than stoking fears of being “swamped” and “over-run”.

Certainly some of David Cameron’s language – and some of the British media’s coverage  of this crisis – has been misjudged, creating suspicion and fear.

In a world afflicted by war and destruction the civilised response is one inspired by the desire to help rather than self-interest and panic.

But no, he still managed to find the time yesterday to pass comment on the prospect of a second independence referendum in Scotland.

It came as no surprise that he’s no fan of indyref 2 and was far from impressed with the first vote.

We can only speculate over what evidence he found for believing one of most exciting debates in Scotland’s recent history was a “very bad period’’, characterised by “turmoil and bedlam’’.

We certainly offer gratitude for the self-restraint which prevented Trump from sharing his views on Scottish independence during the campaign itself, although it would have been better if his vow of silence had been extended by another decade or so.

The owner of Turnberry certainly seems confident about his chances of entering the White House and promises a warm relationship with Scotland once he gets his feet under.

Thankfully it’s unlikely to find out exactly what that means. Surely ....