Britain and France have a responsibility to end the misery of the Calais Jungle

The problem – one of a very many – with the Jungle is that there are no aid agencies working on the ground, which leaves too much space for individual volunteers

Children and young people inside the Calais makeshift refugee camp known as the Jungle (Getty)

There seems no end to the misery of those who find themselves in the squalor of the Jungle camp at Calais. All their depredations are dehumanising; all threaten the physical and mental health of those trying to survive with little shelter, irregular meals and poor sanitation; and all are a standing indictment of the failure of the British and French governments to do anything about the conditions there.

The only UK-French initiative is a useless wall around the port and a pledge to clear the area, which hardly amounts to a plan to resettle people with dignity. When the police and the bulldozers move in, they will lead to even more suffering.

Now we discover that some of those apparently selfless volunteers delivering much-needed aid have been accused of abusing their position of power to take sexual advantage of refugees – including children. It is difficult to understand how such exploitation has been able to happen, yet evidence seems clear enough and the lawless nature of what amounts to a shanty town almost invites it. Perhaps we should not be so surprised.

While the precise scale of the abuse is unclear – indeed, it could not be otherwise, given the circumstances – any such abuse of power by aid volunteers to refugees is obviously deplorable. Some may also be criminal offences and should be dealt with as such. If so, that would represent a rare incursion of justice into this chaotic environment.

The allegations should be taken seriously by the French authorities and an investigation ought to be conducted into exactly what has been happening in the Jungle, both in individual cases and more broadly, irrespective of the immigration or national status of the victims. The British police have to be involved in that too, as British as well as French law has most likely been broken.

So much for the legalities. The moral case for action, meanwhile, is as forceful as it could possibly be. The delivery of physical aid by lorry, van and car, though well-meaning, is rarely the best way to administer help. Far more effective in most circumstances is a donation of money to those agencies working on the ground to help those in most need in camps like this. Those professionals know exactly what is needed and have the experience and means to distribute it on as orderly a basis as is possible.

The problem – one of a very many – with the Jungle is that there are no aid agencies working on the ground in this fashion, which leaves the space for individual volunteers to meet the need. No doubt many are deeply concerned and decent people guided by the best of motives and conducting themselves in a responsible way. But, as we hear today, not all.

The best answer to conditions in the Jungle has always been apparent: settle those with a genuine claim to asylum among the rich nations, on an agreed, rational basis.

In practice, this means settlement across the European Union, where cooperation on this has been tragically lacking. The upshot of that situation is that Germany took on an unfair share of the load, and Chancellor Angela Merkel has been punished for it at the polls, undermining future policy in that country.

It remains to be seen whether this week’s UN summit on refugees, on which some hope was placed, will live up to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s billing of it as “a breakthrough in our collective efforts to address the challenges of human mobility”. The signs are that it won’t, and certainly not so far as the British Government will be driving such an effort. The least we could do is to rescue swiftly those with a right to be in Britain, especially the unaccompanied children, and stop the sexual abuses committed by British citizens. It seems we cannot even manage that.