Well I Was Correct About What The French Would Do If We Exit The E.U.

a reply to: alldaylong
You seem to be missing my point. I am not arguing (here) either way about the legality or the UKs obligation's to the asylum seekers /migrants. Its a simple question of practicality, why do you expect France should shoulder the costs of dealing with the issue of protecting the UK borders if we are not part of the EU?

a reply to: ScepticScot

why do you expect France should shoulder the costs of dealing with the issue of protecting the UK borders if we are not part of the EU?

They are on French soil. It's a French responsibility.

Are you saying The French would quite happily allow illegal immigrants to cross The Channel to The U.K. ? If they would be prepared to do that rather than sort the situation out on their own soil then all i can say is " Shame On Them "

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Don't you have a few sea mines left over from WWII?

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ScepticScot

why do you expect France should shoulder the costs of dealing with the issue of protecting the UK borders if we are not part of the EU?

They are on French soil. It's a French responsibility.

Are you saying The French would quite happily allow illegal immigrants to cross The Channel to The U.K. ? If they would be prepared to do that rather than sort the situation out on their own soil then all i can say is " Shame On Them "

They are on French soil due to an agreement with the UK (as part of the EU) that they are kept there rather than in the UK. If we leave the EU I am not sure why France would be under any moral or legal obligation to keep that arrangement.

This isn't France punishing the UK for leaving, it is removing a special treatment we get by being in the EU.

Seems the France are using Fear as a tactic not a surprise.
So many Brits are well over angered by this.

The argument about where the border starts is separate to where these people should claim asylum.

They are in a safe country, they have passed through several other safe countries.

As soon as they get here they need to be loaded onto a boat and sent back as "failed applicants" because they should, under law, have applied for asylum in the first safe country.

If anything, getting rid of this agreement will probably be a good thing, because the French will have no excuse to gather them all up near the tunnel.

a reply to: ScepticScot

utter bollox - thats the polite response

the border control agreement has zero to do with britains EU membership

france sleepwalked into the mess via the free borders zone

and attempting to weasel out of the treaty is not going to get rid of thier migrant problem either -

a reply to: alldaylong

there is one reason france is doing nothing - its the cheapest option

internment camps - cost money

deportation costs money -

forced documentation costs money

doing nothing = free

get it yet ?

as i said - all that action against the jungle does is move the propblem around france

it does not put a single migrant over the chanel

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: ScepticScot

utter bollox - thats the polite response

the border control agreement has zero to do with britains EU membership

france sleepwalked into the mess via the free borders zone

and attempting to weasel out of the treaty is not going to get rid of thier migrant problem either -

The border control agreement is a bilateral agreement, not conditional on EU membership.

However, on the flip side, it is a hugely unpopular treaty with the French public. So therefore, the question remains, would the French government bother to defend a hugely unpopular treaty that doesn't benefit them in any way if we choose to leave the EU?

The smart money says no. Even if they don't officially renege on the treaty, they would certainly be under no obligation (or desire) to effectively enforce it.

There was actually a very interesting article on this yesterday in the FT (won't let me link for some reason). I suggest all those interested take a look - basically, both sides of the argument are full of s!%# but there would be some very interesting questions raised that don't have any easy answers and if we do leave.

One thing is for certain though, if we do leave and then adopt the "it's your problem" attitude that seems so prevalent in the "Out" camp, we will face a world of hurt. I can guarantee we would be punished for such an attitude (rubbish trade deals, serious trade tariffs, imposition of movements, etc).

originally posted by: SprocketUK
The argument about where the border starts is separate to where these people should claim asylum.

They are in a safe country, they have passed through several other safe countries.

As soon as they get here they need to be loaded onto a boat and sent back as "failed applicants" because they should, under law, have applied for asylum in the first safe country.

If anything, getting rid of this agreement will probably be a good thing, because the French will have no excuse to gather them all up near the tunnel.

Actually, the French will have no obligation to try to stop them getting to the UK. If anything, it will make the problem worse - at least until some long term solutions are found.

Why are we still bleating about this?
Ferry and train companies have ultimate responsibility for who they carry so if the French let them through border control they can easily be stopped from boarding, same as you can't get on a plane without a passport.

£8 Billion a year EU membership fees saved will more than cover the cost of increased security.
Sheesh people get over the lame scaremongering lol
This is a non story and a toothless threat by France.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: ScepticScot

utter bollox - thats the polite response

the border control agreement has zero to do with britains EU membership

france sleepwalked into the mess via the free borders zone

and attempting to weasel out of the treaty is not going to get rid of thier migrant problem either -

If the UK leaves the EU (ending our agreements with all EU members) you expect all other countries to continue to behave the same way to us. Are we attempting to weasel our way of our EU treaties?
You can argue for or against leaving the EU on their relative merits but the idea that we will somehow keep all the benefits with none of the costs seems rather optimistic.

a reply to: ScepticScot

FFS - the border control treaty between france and the UK is NOT an EU treaty - when will this simple fact sink in ?

a reply to: alldaylong

Call me an idiot if you will, but just because, working on the assumption that Britain leaves the EU, the border controls are removed across the Channel, seems it would be easy enough to turn 'em back to France...

Or am I missing something? They do come across via the Chunnel/Ferry, correct? Very controllable points of entry, I so I'm assuming...

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: ScepticScot

FFS - the border control treaty between france and the UK is NOT an EU treaty - when will this simple fact sink in ?

But that is not actually the point - as i stated above, the Treaty is hugely unpopular in France and was only entered into as a gesture of goodwill by the French authorities towards an important ally.

If we leave, given that it is hugely unpopular within France, would the French government enforce said Treaty? Imagine the roles were reversed - how do you think our governemnt would act?

a reply to: ScepticScot

if and its a BIG IF - the UK leaves the EU . all obligations to EU treaties will be null

however if the UK does leave - a hell of a lot will have to be re-instated as UK EU treaties .

But as stated - the border control treaty is NOT and EU treaty - it clearly states that if you read it

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: alldaylong

Call me an idiot if you will, but just because, working on the assumption that Britain leaves the EU, the border controls are removed across the Channel, seems it would be easy enough to turn 'em back to France...

Or am I missing something? They do come across via the Chunnel/Ferry, correct? Very controllable points of entry, I so I'm assuming...

Of course we could refuse entry, but the point is we would be responsible for it and it would be on our shores, not over the Channel as is currently the case. This would obviously mean a huge increase in costs we the taxpayer would face.

There are pros and cons to both sides on most issues (not just this particular issue) but simply saying it will all be alright is simply a childish attitude.

I can guarantee something and that is that if we do leave and take that negotiating attitude to the rest of the world, we are in for a world of hurt.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: ScepticScot

if and its a BIG IF - the UK leaves the EU . all obligations to EU treaties will be null

however if the UK does leave - a hell of a lot will have to be re-instated as UK EU treaties .

But as stated - the border control treaty is NOT and EU treaty - it clearly states that if you read it

Again, that is not strictly speaking accurate. Some EU treaties would be out of the window instantly, others are tied in to other treaties (particularly regarding trade) so would take renegotiation rather than simply ripping them up.

This is why i wish both sides of the argument would just be honest with us. It is far more complicated than being out by either side........i guess wishing for honest politicians is simply too much though.......

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: SprocketUK
The argument about where the border starts is separate to where these people should claim asylum.

They are in a safe country, they have passed through several other safe countries.

As soon as they get here they need to be loaded onto a boat and sent back as "failed applicants" because they should, under law, have applied for asylum in the first safe country.

If anything, getting rid of this agreement will probably be a good thing, because the French will have no excuse to gather them all up near the tunnel.

Actually, the French will have no obligation to try to stop them getting to the UK. If anything, it will make the problem worse - at least until some long term solutions are found.

Maybe not, but as I said before, telling the ferry co.s that they'll be fined for each illegal will make them sort their stuff out. The point about them passing through safe countries also stands, they have no legal right to be here if they refused or failed to apply for asylum in the first safe country they arrived in.

originally posted by: alldaylong
A couple of days ago, i suggested the French would move the Border Controls back to The U.K if we decided to leave The E.U. As posted here:-

www.abovetopsecret.com...

French Minister Emmanuel Macron has now stated exactly that.

France could end UK border controls in Calais and allow migrants to cross the Channel if the UK leaves the EU, a French minister has suggested

www.bbc.co.uk...


The French are so predictable.

Maybe Macron is a lurker on ATS and got that idea from you?