PM says Brexit could bring Calais 'Jungle' to UK

[sutty27]

You would hear millions of folk saying, Yipeeeeeeeeee.

 

Angel1.

 

I think you could be right.

[L00b]

Think your missing the point again. I thought his point was that if we Brexit then they might choose to regard us differently and decide to terminate the agreement. I didnt suggest they would breach it.

I'm afraid you are the poster holding his opinion above the (factual) text of the agreements, international law and the reality of diplomatic relations intra- and outra-EU, missing entirely the core basis and reason for this whole particular group of agreements (with the 2003 Le Touquet only representing a minutely specific aspect of it): the Chunnel.

 

Go read them. Please.

I'm not on a loser with anything I was merely showing you that borgs post didnt have to be just your interpretation. They will have to have some form of agreement, bit from time ti time relations break down and enither of us know what post Brexit relations will look like.

My opinion is informed by the wording of the group of agreements on which this newsbyte was released, and the commonsensical reality of the economic significance of the Chunnel to fret in/out of the UK (seaborne fret is more of course, but the Chunnel is really non-trivial).

 

Your opinion is based on...what? Gut feel and what more?

 

Hope you'll understand my finding it fairly non-compelling so far.

Om suprised how many straw men you made there.

Really? Let's hear them, then.

[999tigger]

You really do get carried away.

 

1. I said " France might regard us and the agreements differently once we left the EU".

I didnt say that entitled them to do anything different within the agreement, just that if they regarded it differently, they then might decide it was no longer in their interest and they may seek to terminate it. I cannot see what is controversial about that. I see you miss this point againg because you decide to make an interpretation I never said.

 

2.We agree the agreements arent dependent on being in the EU.

 

It still doesnt prevent them changing their policy if they wish and seek to terminate or renegotiate their agreements.

 

3. Nobody ever said the Chunnel will disappear.Just a false argument raised by you.

 

So really your points are based on out of context or distortions of what I said, which makes continuing it pretty pointless as you are making points to yourself. France may have a different view of the situation at Calais following a Brexit. Nothing controversial in that. Its a complete unknown whether it will affect our relation with them and whether they want a different policy.If thats the case then they will have to address the existing agreements and consider whether they need to renegotiate them according to the situation at the time.

 

Simply no point in dragging this aspect on because its based on your decision to misninterpret what I said.

[Zamo]

I doubt it will be enough to counter the Corbyn effect. People might agree with UKIP about immigration and leaving the EU, but that's not the same as believing they can run the country.

 

If you think most people who voted UKIP wanted them running the country then you are wrong. Most just wanted them to gain enough power to hold the balance of power. People are sick of both Labour and the Tories talking about being tougher on immigration whilst doing nothing.

 

Now the Tories announce they are so weak on immigration that they would allow migrant camps to be set up in Britain if we dare to vote out of the EU! The Tories are basically saying that all those with immigration concerns have to accept this is as good as it gets and if we try to force things by leaving the EU then they'll make it even worse. I for one can tell you that far from scaring me off it has simply made me angrier. If you ever want people to hand power to nationalists with more extreme ideas on how to deal with migrants then this is the way to go about it. If they keep treating people with contempt then that's what they will ultimately get back. You can see this happening across Europe.

[Eric Arthur]

The panic is over. France has has said that they will continue to have a UK border on French soil no matter if the UK is in or out of the EU.

 

That's a little victory for Cameron.

[Berberis]

The panic is over. France has has said that they will continue to have a UK border on French soil no matter if the UK is in or out of the EU.

 

That's a little victory for Cameron.

 

The Mayor of Calais has said the agreement would end and Blunkett who drew up the agreement also supports Cameron's position.

 

One thing is certain, if we leave there will be issues.

[Eric Arthur]

The Mayor of Calais has said the agreement would end and Blunkett who drew up the agreement also supports Cameron's position.

 

One thing is certain, if we leave there will be issues.

 

Although it isn't up to the Calais mayor and Blunkett has even less say than the Calais mayor. From what I've read the French government thinks that removing the UK border on french soil would result in MORE migrants in France. I think we can safely ignore the idea of migrants setting up camp in Felixstowe next year.

 

Whether or not Cameron was trying to flush out a French position is up for debate, but if he was it worked, and if it wasn't it still worked.

[L00b]

You really do get carried away.

So you say

1. I said " France might regard us and the agreements differently once we left the EU".

I thought you were on about what andyofborg said, and to whom I was replying?

Think your missing the point again. I thought his point was that if we Brexit then they might choose to regard us differently and decide to terminate the agreement. I didnt suggest they would breach it.

As you know and understand indeed, about a possibility of terminating these agreements:

The agreement and it's additions were negotiated between two members of the EU. If Britain was to leave the EU then maybe France would renounce the agreements.

So, no point missed here. All my posts have addressed that very point, and none other. You're the poster who's then come back with a different interpretation and a boatload of "what ifs" without any rational or logical basis. Talk about making a non-point.

 

Let me know when you make up your mind and decide to stop shifting goalposts, m'kay?

 

In the meantime, I'll just leave this link here for you.

Simply no point in dragging this aspect on because its based on your decision to misninterpret what I said.

LOL, look at the hospital mocking charity here Edited February 9, 2016 by L00b

[Berberis]

Although it isn't up to the Calais mayor and Blunkett has even less say than the Calais mayor. From what I've read the French government thinks that removing the UK border on french soil would result in MORE migrants in France. I think we can safely ignore the idea of migrants setting up camp in Felixstowe next year.

 

Whether or not Cameron was trying to flush out a French position is up for debate, but if he was it worked, and if it wasn't it still worked.

 

Personally I expect the French mayor and Blunkett to have more insight into the deal than you or I and its for this reason I would not disregard what they say. The French have a tendency to do what suits them and to hell with everyone else. However, it would be a very dangerous issue if France disregarded its international obligation to check passports of those they didn't want on their soil. The presentant would be far reaching.

[Eric Arthur]

Personally I expect the French mayor and Blunkett to have more insight into the deal than you or I and its for this reason I would not disregard what they say. The French have a tendency to do what suits them and to hell with everyone else. However, it would be a very dangerous issue if France disregarded its international obligation to check passports of those they didn't want on their soil. The presentant would be far reaching.

 

The French Government has even more idea and they say it's not happening.