Re: Brexit discussion
 

Yes, it's not air-tight. Still a lot better than having to deal with the problem in Dover though. We have a good arrangement here and one which is not popular with the French public. It seems that £44 million is a decent price to pay as well, clearly the government thinks so too. Remember that even with this additional payment this is a political cost to Macron, the best thing he can do for support back home is rip up the agreement and tell us to handle our own border. It would be stupid diplomatically of course. We've also committed to helping them with letting them use our helicopters in Africa.

It seems that even after Brexit there are some who just want nothing to do with Europe and to be as anagonstic as we can to the countries of Europe to the extent we'll rip up a beneficial arrangement just to stick it to the French. We're in trouble if even concessions made to us offend the public.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

They are heading to British Soil but got in to France, our border does not cover the whole of France, so they traveled through it, illegally, it is still France's problem, not ours, they only managed to get to Calais because France has weak borders with the rest of it's European countries, why should we have to pay for France's weak borders issue ?

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Imo their constituents wishes trump everything, party loyalty, national vote or self interest

And when they remove controls in calais and usher them through they become our problem, people might call it blackmail but what's in the French national interest to keep these shanty towns going, the people there don't want to be in France they want to be in Britain so why don't they just let them through, be easier for everyone except us!

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I was about to say the same thing. The Le Touquet agreement must be a massive pain for France, I do wonder what's in it for them. It must be tempting to say au revoir, don't slam the porte on the way out.

I was having a look at the cost of deportations. We reported to Eurostat an estimated cost of €407,000,000 to deport 46,610 illegal immigrants in 2014 which works out at as a cost of €8732 per person. Yikes! £44,000,000 extra looks like a bargain at this rate, though I don't know the total cost of running Le Touquet.

Data source - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...7h4/edit#gid=0

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Well, if the illegal immigrants got on a ferry or Eurostar, or a plane, the operators would have to return them at their own expense. It’s up to them to check that those travelling have the appropriate documentation.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Mmmm, don't think a lot of them get a ticket/go via passport control...

France would be well within its rights to tell us to deal with it post Brexit. Hence us having to give them a massive cash sweetener. Working out a bit pricey this Brexit lark....

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Well, that is the appropriate and legitimate means of travel. I don't think France is threatening to let these hordes of illegal immigrants run through the tunnels or force their way onto lorries! So their position should not change on that score.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Without a border in Calais they wouldn't need to force their way onto lorries so much. There would likely still be a French policing operation and checks from the transport companies but fewer than there currently is. The issue at Calais is because the border is there, that's where we check whose coming in. You move the border to Dover, you're moving a lot of the problems to Dover as well. It's also harder to kick someone out of the country than it is to stop them coming in.

£45 million is nothing in Government budgets. Manchester United are about to pay more than that so a football player can play for them for a few years instead of someone else.

I think it highlights how difficult a job Theresa May has with Brexit because there is a not insignificant contingent in his country who'll not countenance any compromise or concession to Europe no matter how beneficial it could be to us. At there mere suggestion it's beneficial to Europe as well they would rather we lose out in order spite them.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

They've been moaning since we joined the EEC and they'll be moaning about everything that's seen as a concession to Europe forever after. It's time for that contingent to raise their game and be grateful that we're leaving and can work together for mutual benefit in the future.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/...-french-proud/
She's a traitor ! Take her to the Tower now...

tbh she voted and campaigned for Remain first time round. I'm sure she'll ensure 'Brexit' is purely cosmetic to limit the damage.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

A leopard never changes its spots as they say Mr K...

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I'm not sure the Brexiters would want to remove her, though!
If you look at her Brexit peers, could any of them hold the Government together and steer it towards Brexit. I think the Conservative Party made the best choice in an era when we're not blessed with many great ones in all parties.
I prefer fellow Remainer Ruth Davidson but she's sensibly decided to remain in Scottish politics for the time being.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Source

So he's quite happy to deny the French people a say on the "Ever closer integration" Very democratic I'm sure.:rolleyes:

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Yes well as we know with Brexit, some people only accept the sort of democracy which yields the required result.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Well it is democratic. Le Pen was offering a referendum, he wasn't and he won. Now he won for different reasons but when you're voting people in you vote for them on a platform some of which may be unpopular.

France isn't run by a dictator. The French people are actually very politically engaged, more so than us, and knew what they were doing. Look at their Presidential debates, they sit down with each other for three hours, having long substantive debates.

Macron went to his country with an unapologetic position of being pro-EU. He didn't lie about that, he didn't even pretend to be conflicted about it, he spoke of it constantly. He said that this was his position and it came as part of the package of his governance even if that particular position had minority support.

I swear this forum uses 'Democracy' without any care for how democracies actually work. Anytime the notion of compromise, unpopular decisions or even an idea is floated that isn't liked out come the cries of 'democracy'. As if every democracy should decide every policy via what currently has 50% plus support. Very few nations manage their democracy this way. The only one that springs to mind is Switzerland.

You just disagree with his decision. That's fine. Dissent is also part of a democracy but seriously let-up on the idea that everything that a government does, including holding a referendum or not, is undemocratic.