The 'No to the EU' campaign

[rs1952]

FiF said:

PRTVR said:

rs1952 said:

Ayahuasca said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eurefer...

Cameron saying that in the event of Brexit, the Calais refugees will end up in the UK.

Er, no.

Er, why not?

To look at this from the French perspective, the migrants are not seen to be their problem. They want to come to the UK, not France. Calais is currently “kettling” them, and a lot of the locals don’t like it. They take the view that their government is doing the UK’s dirty work for it, in letting the buggers stay there in the first place. I heard today (OK from an unreliable source because I am 6000 miles away from it all at the moment so my updates on the news are patchy) that the Mayor of Calais is already suggesting that the French should terminate the border control agreement that they have with the UK.

Move that thought forward to a UK Brexit.

What is in it for the French to retain the present arrangements? They have a problem on their doorstep which they do not see as being of their own making. By the simple expedient of scrapping the current agreement, when the migrants turn up, the local “low life” just sell them a dinghy and point at the White Cliffs in the distance. The French immediately get rid of their problem to their newly non-EU neighbour.

Perhaps there are sufficient PHers to man the machine guns at Capel Le Ferne...?

Be careful of what you wish for

I always find it strange that people are unable to see answers to problems, given that the French are saying it would never happen, if it did the simply answer is to stop using Calais,switch to a Belgium port, then see how long it takes them to sort the problem at Calais.

Let's deal with this Brexit means the French automatically tear up the agreement over UK officials on French soil malarkey.

It's true there are some French officials making those noises, but why? Could it be part of their proEU noises as really all they want is more UK cash to help them. Which is what they get from the current deal. Which of course was arranged because of the accumulated migrants at Sangatte.

So get rid of the agreement and bulldoze the Jungle and now the French will still have the same problem, except they will have to manage it without the millions of funding and resources they get now. Two can play at that game.

"But why?" certainly.

Many Calais residents are about as happy having a refugee camp in their neck of the woods as dandarez would be if they had one at Witney. They don't like it. The natives are getting restless. They don't see the refugees as a Calais or a France or an EU problem, they see them as a British problem. When I was last over there in the Spring of last year, I was reading reports of local businesses complaining that having mgrants all over the place was putting people off coming to Calais, or at least stopping in Calais. Not only do they not like it, but it is costing the local businesses money in lost trade.

In the event of Brexit, it won't take much for a local politician or three to start stirring things up big time.

It may well be that the UK government is currently sending some cash in France's direction to help pay for it but, knowing HM Treasury parsimony, France won't be making much out of the deal for themselves. And in any case "throwing the problem back at the Brits" would be worth a couple of quid for the political capital to be gained from moving the problem 26 miles to the north west. Just point the buggers at a boat if they've got the ferry fare and leave it to Immigration in Dover to sort out. For the French, simples.

FiF said:

Seriously people need to consider the realities of the situation, the control would fall, on each side, as of course French border officials would no longer be allowed in Dover or St Pancras or Ashford etc etc, main part of the burden would fall on non governmental bodies, eg ferry and port operators.

We certainly do need to think about the realities of the situation, and I don't think that the Brexit camp are doing so.

I read your recent posts on the pensions thread and, from that, have gleaned that we are much the same age. I remember, and I expect you do to, border controls between France and Belgium, France and Spain, France and Germany and France and Switzerland. You may not have travelled as extensively as I did back in the 70s by train in Europe (working for the railway and having free passes helped ) but trains ground to a halt on the border, border guards and customs officials got on, and you sat there for however long it took for them to do what they had to do. That sitiuation can easily come back - everything stops at Calais Frethin whilst the French do their bit, then run for 25 minutes under the sea, then stop again at a platform at Folkestone, and the British lot get in and do their bit. When you think about it, when you fly to non-EU destinations that is exactly what happens at airports with no need, for example, for USA customs officials to be in Heathrow or UK ones in JFK.

FiF said:

Meanwhile another Sangatte would develop, and as White Wednesday points out in much more detail then it might prompt adults to sit round the table to thrash out a deal. Le Touquet could be a suitable venue.

Not necessarily. See above

But in any case, the French wouldn't need a deal. They could just wave the buggers through at Calais and let Dover and Folkestone sort out the mess. It is also worth bearing in mind that, of all the EU states, France probably has more to lose by Brexit than the others, not least because of the vast sums we pay towards the CAP which allows their farmers with one cow, two pigs and half a field to stay in business. The French and the British have thoroughly despised each other for over 1000 years, and the withdrawal of the UK's contribution to their farm subsidies could kick it all back off again for another 1000

Avez-vous quelque choses a declare, Monseiur?

[turbobloke]

Still voting Out. Same-old scaremongering stopped working before it started.

[Northern Munkee]

Me too. Out.

You can sit on a stationary train for 25mins.

Calais exists due to Schengen (if the internal borders still existed, it would be a whole lot harder to get to Calais - that's what 'borders' do, and a lack steel to take necessary action in Strasbourg, no Brussels, no Strasbourg on defending its external borders just compounds that.

Edited by Northern Munkee on Wednesday 10th February 20:09

[Funkycoldribena]

Scuffers said:

no F**K RIGHT OFF

So, all you EU lovers, what you got to say about this?

EU Force One: Juncker commutes to Strasbourg by private jet

Jean-Claude Juncker and his top officials fly by private jet between Brussels and Strasbourg - a journey of just 220 miles - as EU forks out for €12m air deal

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/e...

Please, explain to the rest of us why this is all a great idea etc etc?

5 odd hours and still no reply...

[Einion Yrth]

Hilaire Belloc said:

And always keep ahold of nurse
For fear of finding something worse.

Pathetic.

[rs1952]

Northern Munkee said:

Me too. Out.

You can sit on a stationary train for 25mins.

Calais exists due to Schengen (if the internal borders still existed, it would be a whole lot harder to get to Calais - that's what 'borders' do, and a lack steel to take necessary in Strasbourg, no Brussels, no Strasbourg on defending its external borders compounds that.

Of course you can sit on a staionary train for 25 minutes (although the 25 minutes I mentioned was the time trains take from Calais Frethun to Folkestone). Indeed, about 20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s (unless you were going somewhere daft like Czechoslovakia, where Iron Curtain border guards were a little more thorough...) Of ourse, the relevent authorities employed a lot more staff back then, so past performance may not be indicative of future results.

Going off on a tangent to land borders, have you tried crossing from Spain to Gibraltar recently? Allow plenty of time for your journey...

But that is only a side issue. The main reason that I have made a contribution to this thread is to highlight the practicalities of migrants in Calais, where some on here seemed to think that CMD had beeen, shall we say, economical with the truth. I don't think he has been for the reasons stated in my posts. A fecking great can of worms could open there for the UK if we are not careful.

And none of this of course is going to make any committed "out" voter change their minds - I doubt that anything will. But if any of them think that a Brexit will make the Calais problem vanish into thin air then I am afraid they have another think coming.

TB can call it "scaremongering" if he will, but that would really only apply if you are scared of the Calais migrant camps emptying and their contents ending up in Kent PDQ. Are you scared of it TB?

[Einion Yrth]

rs1952 said:

20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s

Was it bks.

[FiF]

Avoiding the quote of a quote fest.

@rs1952 , oh that's an unfortunate juxtaposition of the @ symbol, oops quite unintentional

What a lot just to say you don't think that cancelling the Le Touquet agreement won't send a huge signal to migrants saying it's easier to get to Britain so roll up to Calais or other port. Something that even one of the French politicos questioning ongoing support for the agreement has also suggested.

At which point the Govt will put huge penalties on carriers bringing illegal carriers. Now if it were a land border then that would be more problematic, but it's twenty odd miles of dangerous shipping channel.

Some of the money spent on supporting France in the current arrangement could be spent helping the ferry companies with security, and some on protecting and patrolling the border, but not supplying people with .50 calibre GPMGs like your previous suggestion.

Going to have to disagree unfortunately. Still going to end up with a Jungle or equivalent, plus asylum applications would increase significantly, no question imo.

Anyway from memory something allegedly (of course) said at Britannia RNC Dartmouth, who are our natural enemies? 3rd The chiefs of staff for the Army and RAF, 2nd The Ministry of Defence, 1st The French.

Ref state pension, hope you get better results than I did, complete dog's breakfast.

Edited by FiF on Wednesday 10th February 20:32

[rs1952]

Einion Yrth said:

rs1952 said:

20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s

Was it bks.

I was talking trains. I can't speak for road border crossings (other than La Linea to Gibraltar) because I never drove from the UK to beyond France until after Schengen.

[alfie2244]

rs1952 said:

Indeed, about 20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s (unless you were going somewhere daft like Czechoslovakia, where Iron Curtain border guards were a little more thorough...)

Being about the same age (Me a bit younger ) I remember traveling through Europe very well, in fact for more than 3 years I passed through borders almost on a daily basis repatriating vehicles (insurance drive-backs mostly). I can honestly say the only delays I had were coming back through Dover but then who wouldn't pull a man on his own towing a caravan?

Just remembered the other delays were when the French barricaded the motorways in a way that only the French can get away with.

[rs1952]

Nice to see that we can agree to differ without descending a level or two (but then in truth we generally do )

FiF said:

Now if it were a land border then that would be more problematic, but it's twenty odd miles of dangerous shipping channel.

Which is true, unless or until some of the buggers realise that not only would we still have a land border with the EU after Brexit, but it is also as porous as a fecking sieve. Ask the IRA, they found out years ago

FiF said:

Anyway from memory something allegedly (of course) said at Britannia RNC Dartmouth, who are our natural enemies? 3rd The chiefs of staff for the Army and RAF, 2nd The Ministry of Defence, 1st The French.

FiF said:

Ref state pension, hope you get better results than I did, complete dog's breakfast.

I was a little luckier (but not much) because I wasn't contracted out for the last 13 years of employment. Still means a quite large reduction on the "New State Pension" though... 501 days left before they've got to start paying me some money...

[don4l]

rs1952 said:

FiF said:

PRTVR said:

rs1952 said:

Ayahuasca said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eurefer...

Cameron saying that in the event of Brexit, the Calais refugees will end up in the UK.

Er, no.

Er, why not?

To look at this from the French perspective, the migrants are not seen to be their problem. They want to come to the UK, not France. Calais is currently “kettling” them, and a lot of the locals don’t like it. They take the view that their government is doing the UK’s dirty work for it, in letting the buggers stay there in the first place. I heard today (OK from an unreliable source because I am 6000 miles away from it all at the moment so my updates on the news are patchy) that the Mayor of Calais is already suggesting that the French should terminate the border control agreement that they have with the UK.

Move that thought forward to a UK Brexit.

What is in it for the French to retain the present arrangements? They have a problem on their doorstep which they do not see as being of their own making. By the simple expedient of scrapping the current agreement, when the migrants turn up, the local “low life” just sell them a dinghy and point at the White Cliffs in the distance. The French immediately get rid of their problem to their newly non-EU neighbour.

Perhaps there are sufficient PHers to man the machine guns at Capel Le Ferne...?

Be careful of what you wish for

I always find it strange that people are unable to see answers to problems, given that the French are saying it would never happen, if it did the simply answer is to stop using Calais,switch to a Belgium port, then see how long it takes them to sort the problem at Calais.

Let's deal with this Brexit means the French automatically tear up the agreement over UK officials on French soil malarkey.

It's true there are some French officials making those noises, but why? Could it be part of their proEU noises as really all they want is more UK cash to help them. Which is what they get from the current deal. Which of course was arranged because of the accumulated migrants at Sangatte.

So get rid of the agreement and bulldoze the Jungle and now the French will still have the same problem, except they will have to manage it without the millions of funding and resources they get now. Two can play at that game.

"But why?" certainly.

Many Calais residents are about as happy having a refugee camp in their neck of the woods as dandarez would be if they had one at Witney. They don't like it. The natives are getting restless. They don't see the refugees as a Calais or a France or an EU problem, they see them as a British problem. When I was last over there in the Spring of last year, I was reading reports of local businesses complaining that having mgrants all over the place was putting people off coming to Calais, or at least stopping in Calais. Not only do they not like it, but it is costing the local businesses money in lost trade.

In the event of Brexit, it won't take much for a local politician or three to start stirring things up big time.

It may well be that the UK government is currently sending some cash in France's direction to help pay for it but, knowing HM Treasury parsimony, France won't be making much out of the deal for themselves. And in any case "throwing the problem back at the Brits" would be worth a couple of quid for the political capital to be gained from moving the problem 26 miles to the north west. Just point the buggers at a boat if they've got the ferry fare and leave it to Immigration in Dover to sort out. For the French, simples.

FiF said:

Seriously people need to consider the realities of the situation, the control would fall, on each side, as of course French border officials would no longer be allowed in Dover or St Pancras or Ashford etc etc, main part of the burden would fall on non governmental bodies, eg ferry and port operators.

We certainly do need to think about the realities of the situation, and I don't think that the Brexit camp are doing so.

I read your recent posts on the pensions thread and, from that, have gleaned that we are much the same age. I remember, and I expect you do to, border controls between France and Belgium, France and Spain, France and Germany and France and Switzerland. You may not have travelled as extensively as I did back in the 70s by train in Europe (working for the railway and having free passes helped ) but trains ground to a halt on the border, border guards and customs officials got on, and you sat there for however long it took for them to do what they had to do. That sitiuation can easily come back - everything stops at Calais Frethin whilst the French do their bit, then run for 25 minutes under the sea, then stop again at a platform at Folkestone, and the British lot get in and do their bit. When you think about it, when you fly to non-EU destinations that is exactly what happens at airports with no need, for example, for USA customs officials to be in Heathrow or UK ones in JFK.

FiF said:

Meanwhile another Sangatte would develop, and as White Wednesday points out in much more detail then it might prompt adults to sit round the table to thrash out a deal. Le Touquet could be a suitable venue.

Not necessarily. See above

But in any case, the French wouldn't need a deal. They could just wave the buggers through at Calais and let Dover and Folkestone sort out the mess. It is also worth bearing in mind that, of all the EU states, France probably has more to lose by Brexit than the others, not least because of the vast sums we pay towards the CAP which allows their farmers with one cow, two pigs and half a field to stay in business. The French and the British have thoroughly despised each other for over 1000 years, and the withdrawal of the UK's contribution to their farm subsidies could kick it all back off again for another 1000

Avez-vous quelque choses a declare, Monseiur?

This must be the most hysterical post that has ever been posted on PH.

It doesn't appear to contain any facts at all.

The most used word is "could".

There isn't a shred of evidence to back up any of rs1952's fears. There is some evidence to suggest that a Brexit wouldn't affect the Calais arrangements.

I find it difficult to understand why someone would write such nonsense.

[BlackLabel]

steveT350C said:

RMT union votes to campaign for Brexit

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/articl...

Eta article from June last year but good to remember

The RMT have been anti EU for quite a while - they back the No2EU party which has had candidates, including the late Bob Crow, stand at a couple of European Parliament elections.

However, they have refused to join Vote Leave or Leave.EU.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/eu-referendum-eurosceptic...

[Northern Munkee]

rs1952 said:

Northern Munkee said:

Me too. Out.

You can sit on a stationary train for 25mins.

Calais exists due to Schengen (if the internal borders still existed, it would be a whole lot harder to get to Calais - that's what 'borders' do, and a lack steel to take necessary in Strasbourg, no Brussels, no Strasbourg on defending its external borders compounds that.

Of course you can sit on a staionary train for 25 minutes (although the 25 minutes I mentioned was the time trains take from Calais Frethun to Folkestone). Indeed, about 20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s (unless you were going somewhere daft like Czechoslovakia, where Iron Curtain border guards were a little more thorough...) Of ourse, the relevent authorities employed a lot more staff back then, so past performance may not be indicative of future results.

Going off on a tangent to land borders, have you tried crossing from Spain to Gibraltar recently? Allow plenty of time for your journey...

But that is only a side issue. The main reason that I have made a contribution to this thread is to highlight the practicalities of migrants in Calais, where some on here seemed to think that CMD had beeen, shall we say, economical with the truth. I don't think he has been for the reasons stated in my posts. A fecking great can of worms could open there for the UK if we are not careful.

And none of this of course is going to make any committed "out" voter change their minds - I doubt that anything will. But if any of them think that a Brexit will make the Calais problem vanish into thin air then I am afraid they have another think coming.

TB can call it "scaremongering" if he will, but that would really only apply if you are scared of the Calais migrant camps emptying and their contents ending up in Kent PDQ. Are you scared of it TB?

Spain/Gibralter border control - no I haven't, if the price of security, democracy is time, then that's a fair exchange. Freedom/Liberty comes at a price. It's hard won, and worth fighting for.

And I don't expect any money saved in Brexit to be saved, just reallocated to gaps needing to be filled in the UK by Brexit.

As to your 'can of worms could open there' the can is already open, that's the point. It's been open/opening in slow motion, and more obviously, since the Blair invited all to come and change Britain.

It may already be too late, and our own democracy is not perfect by any means, but I want this country's sovereignty and self determination restored. I like Europeans and they are welcome to apply for access to it and if they or anyone else has skills we want or need, they are welcome to come fit in. But I also understand self interest, and I'd rather the people of this country determine its future as its in their own self interest to see it prosper.

Post Brexit we'll have to work to forge new relationships based on mutual benefit and self interest and as that's the way the real world works, then if the French don't like it and can't look beyond that, to see mutual self interest, then they/we'll both have to lump it and look elsewhere. So be it. We'll manage, like we did for a 1000years.

Edited by Northern Munkee on Wednesday 10th February 21:07

Edited by Northern Munkee on Wednesday 10th February 21:12

[rs1952]

don4l said:

This must be the most hysterical post that has ever been posted on PH.

It doesn't appear to contain any facts at all.

The most used word is "could".

There isn't a shred of evidence to back up any of rs1952's fears. There is some evidence to suggest that a Brexit wouldn't affect the Calais arrangements.

I find it difficult to understand why someone would write such nonsense.

Don - I wouldn't have expected anything less of you.

I am a little surprised, however, that you haven't used the words "leftie" or "bedwetter." You appear to be slipping...

[v8250]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzWqafeAEIE&li...

Oskar Freysinger, he speaks such good clear simple principles. I sincerely hope the next Union of Europe follows the Swiss political structure where the people of independent states vote for the laws and regulations, not the bullst that EU member states have allowed.

[don4l]

Einion Yrth said:

rs1952 said:

20 minutes was par for the course for customs checks back in the 70s

Was it bks.

Why do people just make stuff up?

Do they think that we all have Alzheimers?

rs, please stop making stuff up.

[FiF]

rs1952 said:

Which is true, unless or until some of the buggers realise that not only would we still have a land border with the EU after Brexit, but it is also as porous as a fecking sieve. Ask the IRA, they found out years ago 

They'd have to claim asylum in Norn Oirland then, which has the lowest number of asylum claimants of anywhere. Wonder what the reason is? Suspect genuine refugees would be made welcome, but any others that are a bit sketchy may not be made so welcome perhaps, and they know it.

[don4l]

rs1952 said:

don4l said:

This must be the most hysterical post that has ever been posted on PH.

It doesn't appear to contain any facts at all.

The most used word is "could".

There isn't a shred of evidence to back up any of rs1952's fears. There is some evidence to suggest that a Brexit wouldn't affect the Calais arrangements.

I find it difficult to understand why someone would write such nonsense.

Don - I wouldn't have expected anything less of you.

I am a little surprised, however, that you haven't used the words "leftie" or "bedwetter." You appear to be slipping...

I note that you made no attempt whatsoever to dispute anything that I said.

You wrote a long demented post about the awful things that might happen in the event of a Brexit. It was all total nonsense.

I challenge you to back up anything that you wrote.

You cannot do this, and your best defence is that I didn't call you a leftie or a bedwetter.

I didn't call you a leftie or a bedwetter because anyone reading your posts can make up their own minds.

Now, why don't you explain why an agreement made between Britain and France, without any EU influence, would be annulled if we left the EU.

You cannot do this.

Really.

You cannot.

You are either being disingenuous, or you are a bit special.

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, so I will assume that you are not being disingenuous.

[Scuffers]