Button
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,027
Treaties, eh; I guess they seem like a good thing, or the best possible thing, at the time. I'm not saying that HMG is trying to get out of one unilaterally, since I doubt I have the mental energy to figure out what the Bill is about and, besides, "Treaty obligations only become binding to the extent that they are enshrined in domestic legislation. Whether to enact or repeal legislation, and the content of that legislation, is for Parliament and Parliament alone" - said a good egg recently. I just wonder if the French still think the Treaty of Le Touquet cuts the mustard for them.
(Not my real name.)
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
The situation is thus: we have a Prime Minister, who having spent his life plotting and scheming to get the top job, doesn’t actually have any real interest in doing it now that he has it. That vacuum is filled by a narcissistic Chief Advisor, who is out of control with his fantasy pet projects, with the £1trn State aid for tech sector being the latest.
In normal times, this would have been called out by a strong Cabinet who would have taken leadership seriously and stepped in. However, this Cabinet has been chosen by the Advisor who has ensured that they are all as vacuous as the PM. Suella Braverman about to take center stage in that regard.
Where do we go from here? Well, such incompetence is non discriminatory, so eventually everyone will end up being furious with him - and Boris slinks off on medical grounds early in the New Year.
Apologies for the rant!
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
The early January departure does seem to be gaining credence in the twittersphere.
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
Button wrote:Treaties, eh; I guess they seem like a good thing, or the best possible thing, at the time. I'm not saying that HMG is trying to get out of one unilaterally, since I doubt I have the mental energy to figure out what the Bill is about and, besides, "Treaty obligations only become binding to the extent that they are enshrined in domestic legislation. Whether to enact or repeal legislation, and the content of that legislation, is for Parliament and Parliament alone" - said a good egg recently. I just wonder if the French still think the Treaty of Le Touquet cuts the mustard for them.
Related question for you, Button, if you don't mind.....
I've been thinking the no deal blame game/mitigation logic through, and wonder whether it would be in the Government's interest to end the Le Touquet Agreement? My thought process being that I don't yet think it has registered with people that French controls cause traffic delay in Dover, and vice versa (at least theoretically). So if there were no French controls in Dover, the government could just wave everything onto the ferries, which set sail and then it becomes France's problem? The ferries would of course back up and you'd get delays - but government could say "delays in the Port of Calais is not our problem". You see where I am going with this, what's your view?
Button likes this
Pablo- Registered: 21 Mar 2018
- Posts: 614
If we abrogate Le Touquet, then asylum seekers will be able to board ferries willy nilly. Might be a good thing as the number of clandestine crossings will dwindle to almost nothing and the people traffickers’ business will dry up. If we assume that all those trying to get here are going to succeed in the end one way or another, then why not?
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
Pablo wrote:If we abrogate Le Touquet, then asylum seekers will be able to board ferries willy nilly. Might be a good thing as the number of clandestine crossings will dwindle to almost nothing and the people traffickers’ business will dry up. If we assume that all those trying to get here are going to succeed in the end one way or another, then why not?
Another bonus, people will stop noticing
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
I don't know how to best resolve this issue. The heart of the problem is that we are in the middle of a global refugee situation which can only get worse. As I've said all along, we could always renounce our obligations under UNHCR (we'd be the first nation state to do so) and then we could pull down whatever drawbridges we like.
It's much more likely that the French will knock Le Touquet on the head. I know from my friends and former colleagues in the Nord-pas-de-Calais that there is strong political pressure for this. It's ironic that Cummings and co could well facilitate this if they give the French an excuse for tearing up international treaties unilaterally. Notice period? Sod that!
On the other had, there is a feeling that greater co-operation could allow the UK to process not only standard immigration checks but also asylum applications on French soil. But this too is fraught with complications of costs, subsistence etc.
The fact remains (yes, it's not guff) that things will get a whole lot more diificult if we depart the Dublin regulations without an agreement.
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,027
NM: It all started with the Treaty of Canterbury, which juxtaposed most controls for the Channel Fixed Link. Once post-crossing, 'free exit' was seen as a USP for Le Shuttle, the ferry routes wanted it too. What I can't recall is the original motivation; possibly the perceived impracticality of returning refuseniks on Eurostar, possibly the theoretical reduction in immigration staff (and land-footprint) if checks are performed, trickle-fed, pre-crossing instead of pulse-fed, post-crossing.
Personally, I wonder if the advantages for governments are marginal, although they are significant for carriers and port/terminal operators. I suppose that with ferries and shuttles, there's no doubting from which country any clandestines on board last came. However, note that carriers were (are?) fined per clandestine found post-crossing, which meant that P&O and chums did (do?) their own searches of vehicles waiting to board - in other words, there's still a pinch-point that can cause outbound queues when passenger numbers swamp the available controls.
As for getting out of juxtaposition, a close read of Le Touquet will reveal that it can be done virtually overnight and doesn't require a 2-year notice period.
(Not my real name.)
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
Interesting stuff, thanks, Button. Will watch with interest how things develop there - with my money being on the juxtaposed arrangement possibly ending.
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Back on topic, I see that Natalie voted against the reasoned amendment to the internal market bill last night. She supported Cummings's ridiculous 'eyetest' jaunt during lockdown, was happy to victim blame her husband's sexual targets until a jury decided against him and now seems quite content with breaking international law. I wonder if she will ever grow a spine...
Thanks to the local party. You're doing us proud.
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
As this was only a second reading, you could be generous and give her the benefit of the doubt. If there is no amendment in Committee stage mind you, and government continues this approach - she would have to think very carefully.
Brexit matters to Dover and Deal probably more than people realise. If there is no deal chaos - it'll make her life impossibly difficult.
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Neil Moors wrote:As this was only a second reading, you could be generous and give her the benefit of the doubt. If there is no amendment in Committee stage mind you, and government continues this approach - she would have to think very carefully.
Brexit matters to Dover and Deal probably more than people realise. If there is no deal chaos - it'll make her life impossibly difficult.
I'm not inclined to be generous in this instance, Neil. It's not a 'benefit of the doubt' issue, in my view. She could have abstained like the few remaining Tories of principle did. Her track record is that of a spineless sycophant prepared to follow the party line regardless. OK in normal times but we are facing difficult times exacerbated by the most incompetent govenrment in my lifetime.
Captain Haddock
- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,924
Come on Button - re Le Touquet it's merely pre-clearence which works in everyone's interest.
The US has been doing this for a while at specific airports (pre Corvid) as 'we' have, with a bit of a nod and a wink (suggesting it might not be a good for someone to travel as he's going to be refused which frees up a seat outward and obligation on carrying company to provide a seat back, even if it means 'bumping' a paying passenger).
What's not to like?
"Shall we go, you and I, while we can? Through the transitive nightfall of diamonds"
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,295
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-54158100
Abandoned all pretence now - if you lot won't play ball and start talking about Brexit all over again, we will have to close down a covid testing center and replace it with a lorry park. You've been warned - would you please all do as you're supposed to and start talking about Brexit all over again....
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,027
Captain Haddock wrote:Come on Button - re Le Touquet it's merely pre-clearence which works in everyone's interest.
The US has been doing this for a while at specific airports (pre Corvid) as 'we' have, with a bit of a nod and a wink (suggesting it might not be a good for someone to travel as he's going to be refused which frees up a seat outward and obligation on carrying company to provide a seat back, even if it means 'bumping' a paying passenger).
What's not to like?
Fair question, but it's the French you could usefully ask, not Moi! Mind you, Le Touquet was some time after Canterbury and even then, whilst it provided for juxtaposition at UK and French seaports facing each other across the North Sea and Channel, this boiled down to just Dover, Calais, Dunkirk (sic) and Boulogne in Schedule 2 of The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (Juxtaposed Controls) Order 2003. So in other words, juxtaposition didn't catch-on immediately, nor everywhere.
Incidentally, the nod and a wink vetting also applied to containerised goods.
(Not my real name.)
Reginald Barrington
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 17 Dec 2014
- Posts: 3,227
Neil Moors wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-54158100
Abandoned all pretence now - if you lot won't play ball and start talking about Brexit all over again, we will have to close down a covid testing center and replace it with a lorry park. You've been warned - would you please all do as you're supposed to and start talking about Brexit all over again....
Would that be the temporary one they moved to Rochester?
Arte et Marte
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,027
Phew! Good to see local politicians, Mrs Elphicke or whoever, are on the case:
"Sometimes there are issues @Port_of_Dover resulting in unacceptable severe traffic issues locally.
I am working with @Kent_cc leader @RogerGough2, @DoverDCleader Cllr Trevor Bartlett, and Cllr Nigel Collor to #KeepDoverClear - with a focus on our upcoming exit from the EU."
ray hutstone likes this
(Not my real name.)
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,856
Still waiting to see solutions to the nightmare Dover lockdown with lorries taking over Dover
With no plans to sort it
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Button wrote:Phew! Good to see local politicians, Mrs Elphicke or whoever, are on the case:
"Sometimes there are issues @Port_of_Dover resulting in unacceptable severe traffic issues locally.
I am working with @Kent_cc leader @RogerGough2, @DoverDCleader Cllr Trevor Bartlett, and Cllr Nigel Collor to #KeepDoverClear - with a focus on our upcoming exit from the EU."
I'm guessing you figured that my use of the word 'progess' was meant to be ironic.
Button likes this