Brexit thread - what happens next
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
- Status
Nice, haven't seen that spelling for nearly 200 years.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 26,041
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
From Canon executive.
I think a lot of French politicians were looking for an excuse. The Calais jungle is a significant political problem for them, and growing, so I don't think the deal would have lasted regardless. Brexit just makes it easier for them to walk away.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
As I keep asking when people bring this up....how will the migrants get here? Swim? Maybe the french will give them rubber dinghies and a paddle?
The reason the camps are in Calais and not Kent isn't because of some kind of favour the French were doing for their EU bedfellows, it is because that big ****-off part of sea known as the English Channel is stopping their physical progress.
There is no legal mechanism for France to get the people in the "jungles of Calais" to English Soil. It is illegal for them to use private ferries or trains with passports so what are France going to do, open the channel tunnel and tell 'em "try your luck"???
Think about it for five seconds and you'll see the problem.
If they don't do passport checks on the French side then there's nothing stopping people buying ferry or train tickets to the UK. Nobody checks your visa when you book travel.
When they arrive, the UKBA have to decide whether to send them back or keep them in a camp/prison awaiting deportation. Both options are extremely expensive - on the one hand paying for all those return tickets/using navy ships etc. (I don't know how they deport people tbh) - on the other building and securing a facility.
Ultimately I think it's down to the UK government to deal with people who enter this country illegally properly. The Treaty of Le Touquet is a nice idea in theory - perfectly logical, but it assumed that the French government would be able to deal with immigrants who illegally enter France. The current situation is that it's having a really severe effect on the people of Calais, so I think French politicians do have a duty to do something about it.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
The carrier is responsible for the return of ineligible passengers though, so presumably you'll see the ferry companies checking passports - just like airlines check passports on departing flights even though you don't need a passport to leave. Because they know if you get turned back when you get there, they pay.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Which would be illegal in international law. A country can't overtly and target a withdrawal from its responsibilities to check passports and as I stated it would illegal for any private company to be found taking part in what would effectively be people trafficking.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,614
If they've been camped in France for months they're hardly asylum seekers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 3,030
- Location
- Nottingham
And that'll be the get out clause.
Its simple use the ferries to ship them back or they get charged £10000 fines, if France can allow them to leave the country then the UK should put them on them on a boat and sent back to France. If something like this is done on the very first day after a while the rest would give up coming to the UK, it will be hard but it worth it as a deterrent. If the UK government fold or start accept them, it will be harder to discourage them in the future.
Mr Jack's point is the better one. Until the EU sorts the rules out on people claiming asylum at their country of entry people will shop around.
The point I was making though is nobody does detailed checks on your paperwork on the way out. Fox and estebanrey, obviously those with no travel documents at all will have a hard time getting on a ferry. I guess neither of you have ever gone anywhere you didn't have permission to stay though.
For example, I once got a flight back to the UK from the USA. I have dual nationality but didn't have my UK passport (it was off getting a visa stuck in or smth) so I flew out on the US one. Coming back I turned up with just the US one and had a tough time getting back in because from the perspective of the border guard I had no right to be here. Obviously nobody on the US side checked I had a UK visa. Just like the French ferry people won't check travel documents for rights to enter the UK.
So seems to me that any Jungle residents with (fake) passports or ID cards would be allowed to travel to the UK if the UKBA weren't there checking.
The point I was making though is nobody does detailed checks on your paperwork on the way out. Fox and estebanrey, obviously those with no travel documents at all will have a hard time getting on a ferry. I guess neither of you have ever gone anywhere you didn't have permission to stay though.
For example, I once got a flight back to the UK from the USA. I have dual nationality but didn't have my UK passport (it was off getting a visa stuck in or smth) so I flew out on the US one. Coming back I turned up with just the US one and had a tough time getting back in because from the perspective of the border guard I had no right to be here. Obviously nobody on the US side checked I had a UK visa. Just like the French ferry people won't check travel documents for rights to enter the UK.
So seems to me that any Jungle residents with (fake) passports or ID cards would be allowed to travel to the UK if the UKBA weren't there checking.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
And which international Ferry or Train company is going to be willing to take the huge people smuggling charges they'll face for bringing them over?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_against_the_Smuggling_of_Migrants_by_Land,_Sea_and_Air
Last edited:
it isn't helpful but ferry companies and euro tunnel do have their own obligations to check who is onboard - if the border is weakened by it being moved back to the UK then perhaps shift the onus onto them to enhance security perhaps with some funding/subsidy for the task but also some stronger fines to enforce compliance
I do wonder what the rules will be (post brexit) for returning them to France
Last edited:
If it did happen it would last all of 5 seconds when they realise they are all going to be sent back. The reason there is a camp in Calais is because they have travelled through Europe and through France outside of a port. Moving the passport control from France to the UK port just means they will be contained in the UK port. It won't be possible to set up a camp as they would be refused entry and sent back. It would be no different to sticking people on an aircraft to the US without a visa. They would be turned around at the airport and sent back.
Last edited:
I just posted about this. Who's going to pay for their return ticket? Where will they be housed until then?
From what I've read and my own experience it's not the carrier's responsibility to check visa status before travel.
I do understand what your saying, but lets twist this on it's head.
As we all know it is just a comedy show we are seeing in politics at the moment. All the resignations and whats followed, double dealing, double crossing.
Now let's say that whoever is the next PM wouldn't see Farage as possibly a weapon, in negotiations? We all know he doesn't give in, could he be next PM?
Going on what we have seen since the vote, anythings possible. Tory\Ukip merge? I don't know, i'm just second guessing their next moves
- Status