Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Jeffros Furios]

11 hours ago, jonesy said:

Not sure where @Governor Tarkin is these days, but I'd imagine those six pics may well be getting downloaded to his 'special' folder.

 

He was dragged out of bed in the middle of the night, taken round the back, and double tapped to the back of the head by the secret plod.

 

The snitcheratti must've grown weary and went running to mammy.

 

Sleep well, sweet prince.

[RobboM]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

......

 

That'll put an end to their nonsense. Exclusion from the world's largest marketplace.

Nonsense .... Once they are excluded it just means that Belarus can finally take back control 😂

[Pans Jambo]

16 hours ago, Ked said:

Priti is pretty liberal compared to the practices if EU members when it comes to dealing with migrants.

 

When are you going to admit that Boris and his cronies conned you? It's OK to admit that you have been taken for a ride by a con man and did the wrong thing by voting for, and then promoting this shit show. We wont judge you.

 

Why are you "doubling down" on this farce? 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Pans Jambo

[Ulysses]

8 hours ago, The Mighty Thor said:

I'm minded of Father Ted explaining things to Dougal. 

 

'small, or far away?'

 

[Ulysses]

8 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

I admire your indefatigability. 👍

 

[Ulysses]

RTÉ: More than 30 migrants drown in France-England crossing

 

[Alex Kintner]

25 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

RTÉ: More than 30 migrants drown in France-England crossing

 

This is just awful. Can’t imagine what those people’s last moments would have been like 😞

[Don Dan]

 

£54 million to sit and watch people risking their lives and dying just to get to the UK!

 

I’m not sure myself what is needed to stem the flow. One could argue stop any benefits to those arriving but a counter argument would be it’s inhumane to do that. 
Return them to where they came from if you can confirm their departure country. 

At what point or number of arrivals do you say enough. Then what? 

 

You certainly can’t return them to the EU as it’s against the rules I believe. 

This is not an easy problem to solve and you can guarantee you’ll never get an satisfactory agreement. 

 

[WorldChampions1902]

28 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

RTÉ: More than 30 migrants drown in France-England crossing

 

Absolutely shocking news but I guess the only surprise is that it took this long. The desperation of those poor souls is unimaginable.

[Victorian]

The French authorities should come under attention for this.  Clearly there's not enough being done to prevent crossings and possibly a whole lot worse.  

[Francis Albert]

Dreadful news. But hardly a shock as regularly repeated on the news.

 

Has any research been done on why these people are so desperate to flee the EU (through a number of whose countries most  must have passed through to get to the Channel) to get the supposed shit-hole of the UK?

Edited November 24, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Don Dan]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Has any research been done on why these people are so desperate to flee the EU

 
The question is why are they holed up in camps with nothing in France. Why arnt the French offering them what the UK are offering them so they would feel welcome in France? 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Boy Daniel

[JackLadd]

The bbc suddenly are outraged by this daily attack on Britain, just not for the reasons they should be.

Edited November 24, 2021 by JackLadd

[Malinga the Swinga]

10 minutes ago, Victorian said:

The French authorities should come under attention for this.  Clearly there's not enough being done to prevent crossings and possibly a whole lot worse.  

Pretty sure the French authorities will continue to ignore the issue and encourage as many migrants as possible to attempt to cross channel. 

Pretty sure the French authorities will continue to blame UK and wash their hands of any responsibility.

Pretty sure that there will be plenty of posters on here who will believe French authorities are blameless and that it's all UK's fault.

IF the French were serious about this, they could stop the crossings easily enough, but they aren't and they won't.

 

[Cade]

They're not "fleeing the EU"

 

They just read on MailOnline that they get a free big house if they come to the UK.

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 
The question is why are they holed up in camps with nothing in France. Why arnt the French offering them what the UK are offering them so they would feel welcome in France? 

And indeed the other "safe"countries they passed through on the way to the Channel. A French politician on the news blamed the people smugglers ... rightly. But have authorities tried using some undercover agents to contact those people as potential migrants. A serous attempt to stop the traffic would surely have delivered more and been more of a deterrent than we have seen.0

 

A silly meme of Priti Patel  seems to me a pretty poor reaction to the tragedy.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

30 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 

£54 million to sit and watch people risking their lives and dying just to get to the UK!

 

I’m not sure myself what is needed to stem the flow. One could argue stop any benefits to those arriving but a counter argument would be it’s inhumane to do that. 
Return them to where they came from if you can confirm their departure country. 

At what point or number of arrivals do you say enough. Then what? 

 

You certainly can’t return them to the EU as it’s against the rules I believe. 

This is not an easy problem to solve and you can guarantee you’ll never get an satisfactory agreement. 

 

Good questions. 

12 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Dreadful news. But hardly a shock as regularly repeated on the news.

 

Has any research been done on why these people are so desperate to flee the EU (through a number of whose countries most  must have passed through to get to the Channel) to get the supposed shit-hole of the UK?

Yes its the elephant in the room isnt it ?  Why not just stay in Europe since they have fled from the countries they are in danger from and persecuted. Its an issue which is almost taboo really.  

[Victorian]

The solution is to make the route and mode of travel absolutely and hopelessly unviable.  The trick is how you do it.  The UK,  France and the EU are a million miles apart in trying to come up with a way.  

 

Nobody wants these people and that's the reason why those involved are very unlikely to agree a working plan.

Edited November 24, 2021 by Victorian

[Francis Albert]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

They're not "fleeing the EU"

 

They just read on MailOnline that they get a free big house if they come to the UK.

The Mail has a big readership in the refugee camps has it.

[Don Dan]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

A silly meme of Priti Patel  seems to me a pretty poor reaction to the tragedy

 
It’s pointing the finger at someone who is trying to deal with the impossible. There are many others who should be in the firing line.  

[Alex Kintner]

19 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Dreadful news. But hardly a shock as regularly repeated on the news.

 

Has any research been done on why these people are so desperate to flee the EU (through a number of whose countries most  must have passed through to get to the Channel) to get the supposed shit-hole of the UK?

I’m sure I read somewhere that a lot of those trying to cross to UK (rather than seek asylum in France or other EU country) is because they have family already here.

[Japan Jambo]

On 19/11/2021 at 13:33, WorldChampions1902 said:

Even better is that the numbers are increasing week on week. But now we have “Taken Back Control” of our borders, our destiny is in our own hands and the Tories “need to get on with it”. 

 

even by your usual low bar on memes I have to call you out - that is a really poor and unsubtle dog whistle. Being proud of your country and white is not racist. For the record the Pritti Patel one that follows is pretty shit too.

[JackLadd]

Johnson disappoints me again calling on France to fix a problem he won't deal with. He won't be happy until Eid replaces Christmas as a national holiday. Tow them back or remove to a third country and use the army and navy if necessary. 

[Don Dan]

Just been watching Ch4 news and one of the boats being launched (whilst police in the near vicinity) were from Iraq, Iraqi Kurds. They were saying they had no food electricity water amongst other things. 

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

Johnson disappoints me again calling on France to fix a problem he won't deal with. He won't be happy until Eid replaces Christmas as a national holiday. Tow them back or remove to a third country and use the army and navy if necessary. 

Your examples or suggestions illustrate how impossible it it is for Johnson or Patel or the UK to solve the problem on its own. Send in the gunboats is hardly an answer.

 

Some point to Australia. But there is nowhere within 23 miles of the Australian coast.

[Don Dan]

Just as a matter of interest Spain, The Canary Islands have a similar problem where unsuitable boats are arriving from the Western Sahara. Many of those trying have also drowned. Those that make it are processed via a holding camp. 

[Victorian]

The French have arrested 4 people smugglers.  Taking the utter piss.

[Don Dan]

4 people now arrested in connection with the deaths.
 

Great to hear however if they new of these people why haven’t they been arrested before? 

[Ulysses]

16 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 
It’s pointing the finger at someone who is trying to deal with the impossible. There are many others who should be in the firing line.  

 

If it was pointing the finger at all, it was pointing the finger at someone who would rather smirk at the deaths than prevent them happening.  The post was not a joke.

 

You've got control of your borders.  Now take them in or drown them.  Your borders, your choice.

[Don Dan]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

You've got control of your borders.  Now take them in or drown them.  Your borders, your choice.

These poor souls are crossing the border of the EU. The EU should take them in. They are crossing into the EU and cross borders out of the EU!  Your borders you control them and don’t pass the your problem on to others. 
As for drowning them, good grief man what an accusation to make when they exited the EU which is a safe country or so I thought. 
 

 

[Ulysses]

16 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said:

I’m sure I read somewhere that a lot of those trying to cross to UK (rather than seek asylum in France or other EU country) is because they have family already here.

 

It's been the subject of news reports in the UK already.  If they get into the UK, the UK can't send them back to France.

 

Why?

 

Brexit, that's why.

 

As an EU member state, the UK could return migrants to the EU country from which they travelled to get to the UK, regardless of the country of origin of the migrants.  Under the Dublin Regulation (previously the Dublin Convention), that EU country had to take them - which meant there was no value for the French in letting migrants move on to the UK, because they'd just have to deal with them again as soon as the UK invoked the Dublin Regulation.

 

The Dublin Regulation is still in force, but EU countries are not obliged to take back migrants from non-EU countries, which means France is no longer obliged to take back migrants who exit France and enter the UK.

 

What does that mean for a migrant?  It means that France can process them and send them back, with a fair bit of difficulty, or else if they get to the UK then the UK can process them and send them back with an awful lot more difficulty.  That doesn't give them any guarantees, but it buys them time.

 

Should the French be letting the migrants move on to the UK in a dangerous way?  No,they shouldn't, but official policy is to make life hard for the migrants while processing their claims so they can be sent back.  If the migrants decide to leave of their own accord - in any direction - it's hard to imagine the French spending lots of energy trying to stop them.

[Alex Kintner]

29 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

He won't be happy until Eid replaces Christmas as a national holiday.

What do you mean by this?

[Cade]

There is no such international law about "first safe country you reach".

It doesn't exist.

As a refugee, you can claim asylum anywhere you want.

 

The EU is under no obligation to stop anybody from leaving its borders.

 

Previously, under the Dublin Agreement, the UK could repatriate refugees who failed their asylum claims back to the last point of origin. Then that nation would deal with them.

This is where the myth of "first safe country" was born. People didn't understand how the agreement worked.

But since we left the EU, we are not bound by the Dublin Agreement any more, so the EU is no longer under any obligation to accept any failed refugees from the UK.

 

The UK has failed to come up with a new agreement with the EU on the handling of refugees. 

 

The EU this week has started a process to black list any airlines found to be knowingly flying in refugees to nations bordering the EU (in the wake of Putin and Lushanko's arsehole ploy on the Polish border).

That may stop some movement.

But then you have to cover every other mode of transportation with every other connecting nation between their point of origin and final destination, and that means a lot of diplomacy and deals with all of these nations.

It all leads back to why they're leaving their point of origin in the first place, and what can be done on the international stage to stop that from happening.

Not sure if cutting international aid is a good idea in that regard, or selling weapons to juntas in those regions.

 

[Alex Kintner]

14 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

It's been the subject of news reports in the UK already.  If they get into the UK, the UK can't send them back to France.

 

Why?

 

Brexit, that's why.

 

As an EU member state, the UK could return migrants to the EU country from which they travelled to get to the UK, regardless of the country of origin of the migrants.  Under the Dublin Regulation (previously the Dublin Convention), that EU country had to take them - which meant there was no value for the French in letting migrants move on to the UK, because they'd just have to deal with them again as soon as the UK invoked the Dublin Regulation.

 

The Dublin Regulation is still in force, but EU countries are not obliged to take back migrants from non-EU countries, which means France is no longer obliged to take back migrants who exit France and enter the UK.

 

What does that mean for a migrant?  It means that France can process them and send them back, with a fair bit of difficulty, or else if they get to the UK then the UK can process them and send them back with an awful lot more difficulty.  That doesn't give them any guarantees, but it buys them time.

 

Should the French be letting the migrants move on to the UK in a dangerous way?  No,they shouldn't, but official policy is to make life hard for the migrants while processing their claims so they can be sent back.  If the migrants decide to leave of their own accord - in any direction - it's hard to imagine the French spending lots of energy trying to stop them.

Thanks for that👍🏻. Whether the UK can send them back or not wasn’t the point I making though. I was focusing more on why the UK and not another country. If they have family already here then understandable they’d want to seek asylum here and should be able to without having to risk their life imo. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Alex Kintner

[Ulysses]

4 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

These poor souls are crossing the border of the EU. The EU should take them in. They are crossing into the EU and cross borders out of the EU!  Your borders you control them and don’t pass the your problem on to others. 
As for drowning them, good grief man what an accusation to make when they exited the EU which is a safe country or so I thought. 
 

 

 

When they're in the channel on their way to the UK they aren't France's border control issue; they're the UK's.  France is entitled to process their claims for refugee or immigrant status and send them back home if their claims fail.  That's what controlling borders is about.  If the British are entitled to control their borders, they have no business complaining if other countries do the same.

 

Which means that if they're in the sea on their way to the UK it is the UK's responsibility to let them in or let them drown, and the UK is solely responsible for the outcome.  The same logic applies to Poland at the Belarus border.  Belarus is behaving appallingly, with the connivance of the Russians, but if Poland keeps those people out the responsibility for the outcome lies with the Polish government.

 

The idea that "the EU should take them in" is legally unsound.  Immigration from non-EU countries is a matter for individual member states.  The Dublin Regulation only provides for what happens if a migrant moves from one state to another, and is designed to ensure that immigration and refugee claims are handled by the first country in which a person presents themselves.

[Ulysses]

Just now, Cade said:

There is no such international law about "first safe country you reach".

It doesn't exist.

As a refugee, you can claim asylum anywhere you want.

 

 

Except that the EU has agreed legislation so that the first EU country you reach is - as far as possible - responsible for processing an asylum claim.  They aren't required to accept the claim, but they aren't allowed throw the problem over the border fence at the next EU/EEA country.

 

And as you point out, the EU is no longer under any obligation to the UK in this regard.

[Cade]

Processing yes.

A refugee arriving in Poland and wanting to eventually end up in Germany will be processed in Poland under the terms of the Dublin Agreement.

But as I said, there is no law about having to apply for asylum in the first safe nation you reach.

Anyone can claim asylum anywhere they want.

The EU just treats itself as a single entity for the initial processing, therefor sticking to international law.

[Don Dan]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

and the UK is solely responsible for the outcome.

 
 Sorry but no, that’s shifting the responsibility and the blame which is an easy cop out. If what you claim is correct then what’s to stop the UK just turning the boats around and send the back to the EU (France).

 

The Spanish are already doing the same thing where illegal immigrants are trying to swim to the Spanish enclave(s) that borders Morocco. They are put straight back into Morocco. 
 

As I said in my first post on this sub topic there is no solution that will keep everyone happy and I was right. 

[Ulysses]

This is yet another example of a consequence of the Brexit deal between the UK and the EU.  Originally, the UK expressed an interest in continuing to take part in the Dublin Regulation, but then went cool on the idea because they felt it would create a "pull factor", especially for migrants who already had relatives in the UK.  The UK took a calculated decision that the risks of continuing the system outweighed the benefits.  The EU didn't regard the issue as a priority, so it was dropped.  The effect that we're seeing now is an example of the law of unintended consequences rather than any incompetence on the part of the negotiators, but unless they're prepared to sit down and figure out a way to replace or restore the Dublin Regulation it's not easy to see how it would be solved.

[Cade]

Just now, Boy Daniel said:

 
 Sorry but no, that’s shifting the responsibility and the blame which is an easy cop out. If what you claim is correct then what’s to stop the UK just turning the boats around and send the back to the EU (France).

 

The Spanish are already doing the same thing where illegal immigrants are trying to swim to the Spanish enclave(s) that borders Morocco. They are put straight back into Morocco. 
 

As I said in my first post on this sub topic there is no solution that will keep everyone happy and I was right. 

 

International Maritime Law.

 

That's what.

 

The UK is legally obligated to aid vessels in distress.

[Ulysses]

1 minute ago, Boy Daniel said:

 
 Sorry but no, that’s shifting the responsibility and the blame which is an easy cop out. If what you claim is correct then what’s to stop the UK just turning the boats around and send the back to the EU (France).

 

The Spanish are already doing the same thing where illegal immigrants are trying to swim to the Spanish enclave(s) that borders Morocco. They are put straight back into Morocco. 
 

As I said in my first post on this sub topic there is no solution that will keep everyone happy and I was right. 

 

I'm not shifting anything.  It is the way it is.  The UK can either let them in or let them drown, and take responsibility for the outcome either way.  It is ugly, but it is the law.  Alternatively, you could send them to Belleek and make them our problem.  That would also be ugly, but it would be within the law.

[Victorian]

If viewed from the perspective of doing everything reasonable to prevent severe danger to life,  the EU and it's member states do have a responsibility beyond washing their hands of all duty of care.  They can hide behind all the laws they want but they cannot avoid that as a basic responsibility.  They have a solemn duty to engage in coming up with a solution.

[Don Dan]

@Cade and @Ulysses this is a good article backing up what you are saying. Obviously it was just before Brexit. Ulysses is correct in adding Brexit has changed the scenario in dealing with Illegal immigration and Asylum seekers. 

 

https://fullfact.org/immigration/refugees-first-safe-country/

 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Boy Daniel
Correction

[Ked]

41 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

If it was pointing the finger at all, it was pointing the finger at someone who would rather smirk at the deaths than prevent them happening.  The post was not a joke.

 

You've got control of your borders.  Now take them in or drown them.  Your borders, your choice.

What a load of nonsense.

 

Let's be clear despite you and others continually harping on about "taking control" and brexit it this brexit that.

The migrants and the way they are being processed ,treated is a European problem.

And my posts last night were about that.

As soon as anyone points the light at the EU you and others immediately take to arms .

The fact that french police watch as migrants take to boats and do nothing raises questions as to whether they are any less culpable than the Belorusssian scenario.

 

 

[Ked]

9 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Gammon. Gammon. Gammon. Gammon. Gammon gammon gammon, gammon.

 

Gammon.

 

Grow up .

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

If viewed from the perspective of doing everything reasonable to prevent severe danger to life,  the EU and it's member states do have a responsibility beyond washing their hands of all duty of care.  They can hide behind all the laws they want but they cannot avoid that as a basic responsibility.  They have a solemn duty to engage in coming up with a solution.

 

The EU doesn't.  Individual member states do.  That's the law.  That's the law the Brexiteers pretended didn't exist, but it does.  That's the law that means individual member states are responsible for control of their own borders.

 

The EU can't act ultra vires its own powers.  And it is legally and constitutionally unsound to say that the rule of law should be switched on and off as and when the circumstances suit us.

[Ked]

4 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

When are you going to admit that Boris and his cronies conned you? It's OK to admit that you have been taken for a ride by a con man and did the wrong thing by voting for, and then promoting this shit show. We wont judge you.

 

Why are you "doubling down" on this farce? 

Missing the point .

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, Ked said:

 

EU!

 

FLOOR!

 

SHIT ON!

 

 

I fixed your post for you.  You're welcome.

[Alex Kintner]

18 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 
 Sorry but no, that’s shifting the responsibility and the blame which is an easy cop out. If what you claim is correct then what’s to stop the UK just turning the boats around and send the back to the EU (France).

 

The Spanish are already doing the same thing where illegal immigrants are trying to swim to the Spanish enclave(s) that borders Morocco. They are put straight back into Morocco. 
 

As I said in my first post on this sub topic there is no solution that will keep everyone happy and I was right. 

I really just wish they could put the politics aside and find a solution on this. There’s groups of people dying on an almost daily basis. 

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

The EU doesn't.  Individual member states do.  That's the law.  That's the law the Brexiteers pretended didn't exist, but it does.  That's the law that means individual member states are responsible for control of their own borders.

 

The EU can't act ultra vires its own powers.  And it is legally and constitutionally unsound to say that the rule of law should be switched on and off as and when the circumstances suit us.

 

All parties CAN act in best faith to find a solution.  To prevent people dying.