Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Protest resources obviously. They are protesting by focusing on Jersey, the nearest part of the UK to them...seems simple enough.

yep, that's what I thought.

How about you do a bit of reading up on the subject

https://www.bbc.com/news/57001584

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Obviously the EU think agreement is being broken by UK and they said just that, uk does have a long history of breaking agreements as well.

Something is very fishy here

you do know that Jersey isn't actually in the UK, right?

steddyeddy

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You do know Jersey has it's own fully functioning power plant right?

Some power station.....

An estimated 95% of the island's electricity arrives by undersea cables from France, which is only 14 miles away.

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

The real question does Boris?

He signed an international agreement (on behalf of jersey) which is being broken it seems

I would bet my life savings no Boris knowing a lot more about the situation than you do.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

yep, that's what I thought.

How about you do a bit of reading up on the subject

https://www.bbc.com/news/57001584

The French fishermen are unhappy about the British reneging on deals about fishing rights. They are obvoiously targeting areas. First imports to Boulonge now Jersey. Seems fairly clear to me.

10000maniacs

the Jersey locals are firing shots. LOL.

https://twitter.com/ITVChannelTV/status/1390209161317728257?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1390209161317728257%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ladbible.com%2Fnews%2Fuk-man-from-jersey-re-enactment-group-fires-musket-at-french-boats-20210506

steddyeddy

Aegir wrote: »

I would bet my life savings no Boris knowing a lot more about the situation than you do.

You're saying Boris "no border in the Irish sea" Johnson is up on the details of the deals he signs?

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

The bbc article YOU posted had this gem

—-

However, the UK government is ultimately responsible for its international relationships. That's why access to fishing waters around the Channel Islands are dealt with specifically in the new UK-EU trade agreement.
—-

I would bet that Boris did not read “the best deal ever” he put his signature on

Not it seems you read articles you post

yes, so basically the States of Jersey tell the UK government what they want the UK government manages that on their behalf.

So the basic agreement is that French fishing boats that have a history to fish in Jersey waters can continue to fish there, subject to them getting a licence. Job done, UK and EU agree this, all put to bed.

The Bailiwick of Jersey issues those licences and appear to have put some additional requirements in there, or been a bit fast with the number of days it is allowing boats to fish.

This is why (and the thing francie can't get his head around) the French maritime minster made the frankly bizarre threat to cut off the power to Jersey and why the boats went there this morning, not because it's close to France and easier to get to.

The UK, as part of it's obligations to Jersey as a Crown dependency, is also responsible for the martime protection of the Channel islands and this includes fisheries, hence the Royal Navy (and not Dorset police:rolleyes:) sending two fisheries protection ships over to monitor the situation.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

yes, so basically the States of Jersey tell the UK government what they want the UK government manages that on their behalf.

So the basic agreement is that French fishing boats that have a history to fish in Jersey waters can continue to fish there, subject to them getting a licence. Job done, UK and EU agree this, all put to bed.

The Bailiwick of Jersey issues those licences and appear to have put some additional requirements in there, or been a bit fast with the number of days it is allowing boats to fish.

This is why (and the thing francie can't get his head around) the French maritime minster made the frankly bizarre threat to cut off the power to Jersey and why the boats went there this morning, not because it's close to France and easier to get to.

The UK, as part of it's obligations to Jersey as a Crown dependency, is also responsible for the martime protection of the Channel islands and this includes fisheries, hence the Royal Navy (and not Dorset police:rolleyes:) sending two fisheries protection ships over to monitor the situation.

They could have 'monitored' it with a pair of binoculars from the coast and had a warship there within hours if the French suddenly used their fishing fleet to invade or begin firing missiles.

The UK look like overreacting Britannia Rules the Waves fools Aegir, AGAIN, not to mention irresponsible fools.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They could have 'monitored' it with a pair of binoculars from the coast and had a warship there within hours if the French suddenly used their fishing fleet to invade or begin firing missiles.

The UK look like overreacting Britannia Rules the Waves fools Aegir, AGAIN, not to mention irresponsible fools.

Francie, you are just being daft.

Navies carry out fisheries protection, it’s part of their job.

That’s why an Irish warship arrested a northern Irish fishing crew off Dundalk a few years back, not a copper in a dinghy.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Francie, you are just being daft.

Navies carry out fisheries protection, it’s part of their job.

That’s why an Irish warship arrested a northern Irish fishing crew off Dundalk a few years back, not a copper in a dinghy.

Nobody was fishing Aegir.

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Hmm we should really ramp up our military or get into nato ASAP as we are now located next to numpties who think it’s 19th century

I doubt Ireland will be going to war with the uk anytime soon, but yes the Irish military are planning on increasing fishery patrols.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40192794.html

FrancieBrady

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Hmm we should really ramp up our military or get into nato ASAP as we are now located next to numpties who think it’s 19th century

'Wily waving' is what Peter Foster an editor at the Financial Times. called it. The UK even looking silly to their own.

indioblack

Aegir wrote: »

I doubt Ireland will be going to war with the uk anytime soon, but yes the Irish military are planning on increasing fishery patrols.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40192794.html

Will they be built in the same shipyards that constructed the current fleet?

Timberrrrrrrr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Wily waving' is what Peter Foster an editor at the Financial Times. called it. The UK even looking silly to their own.

Haven't heard a single person mention it all day, it seems to be a bigger deal to the barstool Republicans of boards than the citizens of the UK.

FrancieBrady

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Haven't heard a single person mention it all day, it seems to be a bigger deal to the barstool Republicans of boards than the citizens of the UK.

Now that is funny.

Timberrrrrrrr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Now that is funny.

Hilarious that its bothered you more than the people I have been talking to all day.

FrancieBrady

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Hilarious that its bothered you more than the people I have been talking to all day.

You are confusing entertainment with botheration.

Timberrrrrrrr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are confusing entertainment with botheration.

So entertaining that you have to post on every thread pertaining to the UK, Admit it Francie you're addicted to posting about them, they fill your day :pac:

FrancieBrady

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So entertaining that you have to post on every thread pertaining to the UK, Admit it Francie you're addicted to posting about them, they fill your day :pac:

How many threads are there on the UK Timberrrr. (are you getting a bit paranoid?)
There's one on British Politics/Scottish Independence/Harry & Meghan/Corbyn and many more I don't post on. Not only are you paranoid but prone to exaggeration when you don't like what is said. Not the first time you have thrown that bit of off-topic personal attack.
No need to reply...I'm not going there with you. This is a good thread.

RobMc59

The worrying latest development in post brexit UK.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-citizens-detained-uk-work-visas-brexit/

Timberrrrrrrr

RobMc59 wrote: »

The worrying latest development in post brexit UK.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-citizens-detained-uk-work-visas-brexit/

What's "worrying" about it?

indioblack

indioblack wrote: »

Will they be built in the same shipyards that constructed the current fleet?

Rumour has it that they are buying two patrol ships from New Zealand.

A few years old, but hardly used apparently

ambro25

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

What's "worrying" about it?

All proceeding entirely as expected from the UK there, so nothing whatsoever.

But to a Brit recalling the principle of reciprocity of treatment enshrined in the WA and the TCA, I can ûnderstand some worry indeed.

Heh: you broke it, you bought it :pac:

RobMc59

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

What's "worrying" about it?

A number of UK citizens living in Spain have already been incorrectly refused entry there recently and I hope any escalation doesn't result in more of the same.
I have no problem with the UK or EU applying the agreed terms.

Peregrinus

I think the issue isn't whether people are correctly or incorrectly refused entry; it's how you treat people who are refused entry.

In the UK, they cart them off to immigration detention centres, which are pretty horrifying places. EU countries haven't been treating UK citizens denied entry in a corresponding fashion. So far.

Timberrrrrrrr

RobMc59 wrote: »

A number of UK citizens living in Spain have already been incorrectly refused entry there recently and I hope any escalation doesn't result in more of the same.
I have no problem with the UK or EU applying the agreed terms.

So following the rules/regulations that they had already set in place is "worrying" to you?

Timberrrrrrrr

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think the issue isn't whether people are correctly or incorrectly refused entry; it's how you treat people who are refused entry.

In the UK, they cart them off to immigration detention centres, which are pretty horrifying places. EU countries haven't been treating UK citizens denied entry in a corresponding fashion. So far.

It's explained why they are detained in the article

The length of their detentions is partly explained by travel restrictions imposed because of the coronavirus pandemic, which mean there are fewer flights available to return EU nationals and the Home Office must also arrange the COVID-19 test required before their return.

Does Ireland not do the same with people who illegally enter the country?

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/Kilsally/status/1390759034102427651

Eight prominent unionists involved in negotiating the Good Friday Agreement have called for the Northern Ireland Protocol to be suspended.

A letter has been sent to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, taoiseach (Irish PM) Micheál Martin, US President Joe Biden and European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic.

Peregrinus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

It's explained why they are detained in the article

Yes, I know. So what? The problem isn't that nobody understands why they are being detained, so explaining why they are being detained kind of misses the point.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Does Ireland not do the same with people who illegally enter the country?

God, have you been reading the Daily Mail again? You know that's no good for you. We've talked about this before.

These people haven't "entered the country illegally". They have presented themselves and the border and applied to be admitted, which they are perfectly entitled to do under UK law. They have broken no laws. They have been denied entry, which also does not mean that they have broken any laws. If they had broken any laws, they would at least be entitled to access to lawyers, to be brought before a court, to challenge the evidence against them, etc.

No, Ireland does not treat people who are denied entry in this fashion. The UK is, if not unique, then in pretty small group of countries as regards the cynical cruelty of its immigration enforcement system.

Timberrrrrrrr

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, I know. So what? The problem isn't that nobody understands why they are being detained, so explaining why they are being detained kind of misses the point.


God, have you been reading the Daily Mail again? You know that's no good for you. We've talked about this before.

Really?

I have never read the DM and we have never "talked about this before" so save your condescending shìte for someone else.

people haven't "entered the country illegally". They have presented themselves and the border and applied to be admitted, which they are perfectly entitled to do under UK law. They have broken no laws. They have been denied entry, which also does not mean that they have broken any laws. If they had broken any laws, they would at least be entitled to access to lawyers, to be brought before a court, to challenge the evidence against them, etc.

And they were denied entry, attempting to enter a country to work when not entitled is against the law.

No, Ireland does not treat people who are denied entry in this fashion. The UK is, if not unique, then in pretty small group of countries as regards the cynical cruelty of its immigration enforcement system.

I suggest you look up Ireland treatment of people who have presented themselves at borders and ended up in direct provision centers.

Peregrinus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Really?

I have never read the DM and we have never "talked about this before" so save your condescending shìte for someone else.

So where did you get the bizarre idea that these people have broken the law? You must have got it somewhere. Or did you just make it up?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And they were denied entry, attempting to enter a country to work when not entitled is against the law.

No, it isn't. And if you say it is then link, please, to the UK law in question. And if you find yourself unable to link to the UK legislation which makes it unlawful to apply for entry when your circumstances lead to you being refused, have a think about why that might be.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I suggest you look up Ireland treatment of people who have presented themselves at borders and ended up in direct provision centers.

They haven't been denied entry; they have applied for asylum. Different thing entirely.

I'm not a fan of the direct provision system by any means, but if you think it's how we in Ireland deal with people who are denied entry you don't know a great deal about direct provision. And if you think being in direct provision in Ireland is even remotely like being in a UK immigration detention centre, you don't know much about UK immigration detention centres.

Seth Brundle

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Kilsally/status/1390759034102427651

Given that one if the signatories to this demand is barrister David Trimble, one would be forgiven for wondering why he is making demands such as this unless he does not believe that his current legal challenge will be successful.

Peregrinus

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Given that one if the signatories to this demand is barrister David Trimble, one would be forgiven for wondering why he is making demands such as this unless he does not believe that his current legal challenge will be successful.

His "current legal challenge" was abandoned at the end of March. On the crowdjustice.com fundraising page for the challenge there is a garbled and not very plausible account of why they abandoned it, which boils down to "we showed our arguments to the government's lawyers and they didn't think we had any chance of beating them so, obviously, we couldn't bring the case".