Speaking from a nation largely founded by refugees (which even we seem to constantly forget about) I contest the idea that they are a bunch of lazy leeches.
UNLESS... they are willing to integrate, learn the language and do a spot of work. Unfortunately, as a lot of countries can agree with, there is a rather big group that refuse to do any of that but at the same time demand a lot of stuff.
This is a large part of the immigrant paradox. Locals want to give them little or nothing to work with, and are somehow surprised when they don't prosper into contributing citizens; or, when they do, decide they were given too much, too easy.
Refugees tend to end up 'where they can get to'.
This isn't just about geographic location, either - particularly in today's interconnected world. Perhaps they have family in the UK, and want to connect with the only people in the world they know; perhaps they speak some English, and know they will be more comfortable and successful in a country where they can communicate; perhaps they simply aren't being all that welcomed in France and are under immense pressure to move along. Note that refugee camps aren't really known for healthy living and safety.
You cannot flee your home country, demanding that another country will just welcome you, give you a house and a job.
Actually, I think there is some notion of a basic human entitlement to the necessities of life, which every country and person should respect on some fundamental level. Under the threat of violence, starvation, and persecution that the IS represents that should not have to be demanded
. I rarely like to speak in absolutes, and there is certainly a great deal of discussion that needs to occur about addressing the causes of emigration and sharing the burden, but I believe it is basic morality that children should not be left to starve or men and women to be murdered because we want to save a few tax dollars for another iPad.