France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
I agree it is a shame. Although I cant help thinking that talks were scheduled to take place until Boris published the letter he sent Macron. Boris just hasnt got a clue. You have to assume that had he not published the letter, that talks would be still going ahead. Some of the solutions put forward dont seem realistic. If the situation was reversed, and the French proposed posting their police, or military, with powers of arrest on our shores, Boris would be the first to scream about Sovereignty. I am not sure that policing such a large coastline can put a stop to the crossings. The French Police have been ridiculed in the British press for standing by while the migrants launch their boats. Yet there were 2 police officers, and 40 asylum seekers, determined to cross the channel. What did they expect them to do? If you were an asylum seeker that may have parted with your life savings to get a place on a boat, you are unlikely to be discouraged very easily.
I think that the way to discourage them is to not allow anyone to apply for asylum if they have arrived illegally. Allow applications from people that arent in the UK. Crossing the channel would then be pointless. Currently the opposite is true, you have to arrive illegally to apply for asylum. This is the problem that has to be addressed.
If we could also speed up the application procedure in line with Germany, we wouldnt be putting them up in hotels and costing the British taxpayer a fortune. If channel crossings became pointless there would be no further loss of life.
We should reach an agreement with the French that any illegal arrivals from France will be dropped back there. If we did this, it wouldnt take very long before the people traffickers were put out of business.
I wholeheartedly agree with pretty much all of that.
The only thing I would add is this.
If the UK and France could concentrate on the problem, instead of playing Billy Big B0ll0cks, this could be resolved in days. for example:-
1. UK to send people to France to process UK asylum-seekers; or 2. UK to help fund France doing this on our behalf, France to forward arguable cases to the UK OR deal with agreed perameters
France to choose. In return, any boat migrants via France to be agreed to be returned.
How difficult is that?
The Head of UK Border Force has zero previous experience in Customs or Immigration. But he is/was a career Diplomat. If he can't spot a Diplomatic solution, exactly why has he got the job?
I think it is quite an easy problem to solve. There is no need to police a huge coastline. Once it became common knowledge that all illegals would be returned, crossings would stop.
If the EU introduced similar legislation it would help everyone. If the EU said that asylum seekers had to remain in the first safe country they reached, but could apply for asylum wherever they wanted to go. The current system is probably unfair to Spain, Italy, and Greece. Any illegals found travelling through Europe, could be sent to Turkey. Any failed applicants could be sent to Turkey. Applications should be dealt with within 6 months. Suddenly the whole problem is under control. Including the French problem which would no longer exist.
Backbench Tories head to Downing Street for face-off with Boris Johnson after 'a dozen MPs hand in letters of No Confidence in PM' - as Rishi Sunak is named 'politician of the year' in further sign of the Chancellor's political ascendancy
The 17-strong executive of the 1922 Committee had talks with the Prime Minister this afternoon amid an alarming slump in his popularity with voters.
Read a fascinating article in relation to population density (link below). It caused me to reevaluate what amounts to a crowded country.
Typically, people talk about "arithmetic density"-which is area divided by population. But that is totally inaccurate in relation to any measure as to what a country could/should be doing in relation to migrants, having regard to population density.
The 2 far more relevant statistics take into account 2 other important factors. Firstly, it says that we should disregard areas where absolutely no-one lives. If there are 0 people living in a square kilometre, the reason is simple-that square kilometre cannot support human life. Hence "lived density" is far more important than simple area. To give an extreme example, Western Australia is the size of Western Europe. But, with the exception of one corner of WA, the rest of that huge area has next to no people in it.
The 2nd example shows the most densely populated part of each country. On both counts (for example) Spain has a massively higher "built up density", because large parts of Spain do not have anyone living in them.
One interesting part of this study shows that the different parts of the UK show massively different abilities to support an increased population.
Out of the 39 European countries in the study, England had the 6th highest built up density. And 3 of the countries above it were tiny (Monaco/Andorra/Malta). Compare and contrast with the rest of the UK-Wales 24th, Scotland 25th, and Northern Ireland 31st. All with lived in density of way less than 50% of England.
to give 1 example, Scotland has more than half the size of England. Due to the Borders and Highlands/Islands having different geographical features to England, less than half of Scotland's area can support life in comparison to England. So-you might assume on those figures that Scotland would have a population of 20-25% of England. But it is less than 10% (5 million to 52 million).
Read a fascinating article in relation to population density (link below). It caused me to reevaluate what amounts to a crowded country.
Typically, people talk about "arithmetic density"-which is area divided by population. But that is totally inaccurate in relation to any measure as to what a country could/should be doing in relation to migrants, having regard to population density.
The 2 far more relevant statistics take into account 2 other important factors. Firstly, it says that we should disregard areas where absolutely no-one lives. If there are 0 people living in a square kilometre, the reason is simple-that square kilometre cannot support human life. Hence "lived density" is far more important than simple area. To give an extreme example, Western Australia is the size of Western Europe. But, with the exception of one corner of WA, the rest of that huge area has next to no people in it.
The 2nd example shows the most densely populated part of each country. On both counts (for example) Spain has a massively higher "built up density", because large parts of Spain do not have anyone living in them.
One interesting part of this study shows that the different parts of the UK show massively different abilities to support an increased population.
Out of the 39 European countries in the study, England had the 6th highest built up density. And 3 of the countries above it were tiny (Monaco/Andorra/Malta). Compare and contrast with the rest of the UK-Wales 24th, Scotland 25th, and Northern Ireland 31st. All with lived in density of way less than 50% of England.
to give 1 example, Scotland has more than half the size of England. Due to the Borders and Highlands/Islands having different geographical features to England, less than half of Scotland's area can support life in comparison to England. So-you might assume on those figures that Scotland would have a population of 20-25% of England. But it is less than 10% (5 million to 52 million).
HM Revenue and Customs has struck a deal to relocate tax officials into a new office complex in Newcastle owned by major Conservative party donors through an offshore company based in a tax haven, the Guardian can reveal.
The department’s planned new home in the north-east of England is part of a regeneration scheme developed by a British Virgin Islands (BVI) entity controlled by the billionaire property tycoons David and Simon Reuben.
The deal will see officials at the government department responsible for preventing tax avoidance working from a site owned by a subsidiary of a company based in a secretive offshore tax jurisdiction.
The Reuben brothers, their family members and businesses have donated a combined £1.9m to the Tories. Earlier this week, the brothers are reported to have shared a table with Boris Johnson at an exclusive Tory party fundraising dinner.
On Tuesday, officials including the Cabinet Office minister Steve Barclay announced HMRC had agreed the 25-year lease with one of the Reuben brothers’ companies.
The brothers are the second richest family in the UK, according to the Sunday Times’s rich list. David Reuben’s son, Jamie, is a close ally of the prime minister and has served as a Tory party treasurer. He has donated more than £750,000 to the party since Johnson entered Downing Street.
The Reuben family has built a significant presence in Newcastle in recent years and is part of the controversial Saudi Arabia-led consortium that acquired Newcastle United football club in October.
Company filings show the family has frequently used BVI companies to hold its UK business interests, which include a luxury London property portfolio and a string of racecourses.
Combatting offshore tax evasion and avoidance is described as one of HMRC’s priorities and earlier this year the department unveiled plans to crack down on offshore tax avoidance by targeting UK-based entities facilitating the sale of avoidance schemes using tax havens.
Responding to the move, Dame Margaret Hodge, a Labour MP and chair of the cross-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, said: “It’s outrageous that HMRC should be using taxpayers’ money to benefit somebody that relies on offshore structures based in tax havens.”
HM Revenue and Customs has struck a deal to relocate tax officials into a new office complex in Newcastle owned by major Conservative party donors through an offshore company based in a tax haven, the Guardian can reveal.
The department’s planned new home in the north-east of England is part of a regeneration scheme developed by a British Virgin Islands (BVI) entity controlled by the billionaire property tycoons David and Simon Reuben.
The deal will see officials at the government department responsible for preventing tax avoidance working from a site owned by a subsidiary of a company based in a secretive offshore tax jurisdiction.
The Reuben brothers, their family members and businesses have donated a combined £1.9m to the Tories. Earlier this week, the brothers are reported to have shared a table with Boris Johnson at an exclusive Tory party fundraising dinner.
On Tuesday, officials including the Cabinet Office minister Steve Barclay announced HMRC had agreed the 25-year lease with one of the Reuben brothers’ companies.
The brothers are the second richest family in the UK, according to the Sunday Times’s rich list. David Reuben’s son, Jamie, is a close ally of the prime minister and has served as a Tory party treasurer. He has donated more than £750,000 to the party since Johnson entered Downing Street.
The Reuben family has built a significant presence in Newcastle in recent years and is part of the controversial Saudi Arabia-led consortium that acquired Newcastle United football club in October.
Company filings show the family has frequently used BVI companies to hold its UK business interests, which include a luxury London property portfolio and a string of racecourses.
Combatting offshore tax evasion and avoidance is described as one of HMRC’s priorities and earlier this year the department unveiled plans to crack down on offshore tax avoidance by targeting UK-based entities facilitating the sale of avoidance schemes using tax havens.
Responding to the move, Dame Margaret Hodge, a Labour MP and chair of the cross-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, said: “It’s outrageous that HMRC should be using taxpayers’ money to benefit somebody that relies on offshore structures based in tax havens.”
I dont suppose we will ever get to the bottom of it.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
Voices: This is the real reason Priti Patel has been barred from France
There is some irony in the fact that about the only person the French are not allowing into their country right now is Priti Patel. In an unusually blunt diplomatic snub, her day trip to Calais on Sunday has been cancelled – and so have the scheduled face-to-face talks with the French authorities about the loss of life in the English Channel.
One hopes they’ll still pick up the phone for her but you never know. Given the enormity of what has happened, it seems a bit impetuous – childish, even – banning Patel from her own meeting but it does go to show how dreadful Anglo-French relations have become and how weak the UK is.
Apparently the French didn’t like the tone of Boris Johnson’s letter to the president of the republic, nor that he shoved it out on Twitter. That is not how such things should be done Monsieur Johnson, they were telling him, and they have a point.
It’s maybe not the first time Johnson’s had a bit of trouble with a French letter but the tone was all wrong. Johnson – of all people – was offering his sage advice on how they should be running their backward little country.
They don’t really need that and they don’t really want to enact his helpful suggestion that they let the British patrol their borders for them, seeing as they can’t be bothered.
After all, the job of any country’s border force is to stop people getting in, not so much to prevent them from lawfully leaving. As Macron says, these people do not wish to live in France and he cannot make them.
Rather tellingly, the French explained that the British ideas are unacceptable because they violated the “sovereignty” of France. Whoever is at fault in this, it seems plain that nothing will be done as a result of the tragedy this week and the people who will suffer from this spat are the refugees still attempting a Channel crossing in flimsy boats and worsening weather; more will die.
You have to admit that Brexit has not helped. Like so many divorces where the participants believe that it’s all going to be quite amicable, leaving the EU was always going to be acrimonious – and so it has proved.
Within the EU’s structures, the British and the French had to talk to one another and the other EU partners involved in the migrant crisis – such as Italy, Malta and Greece and now Poland and Lithuania.
We did have the Dublin Regulation system for pan-EU migrant returns, which may not have been perfect but was at least some sort of agreement. Now, there is none.
Where once Britain could exert influence and some power over EU migration policy and what was happening “upstream” in the Mediterranean and policy towards Turkey, the British now have next to no say.
The old concept of shared sovereignty meant that the British would no longer have complete control over their own borders but in return would have a say on the border regime across the whole continent, which was of some use. At the moment, the British have no say over anyone else’s border policies and little practical control of their own.
The migrant crisis is bigger than Britain and indeed bigger than Britain and France. It is precisely the kind of thing that demands action at a supranational scale. This was what was going to be happening over the weekend, when Patel was going to swap ideas and contacts with counterparts from a half dozen other European countries – just like the old days in an EU Council of Ministers meeting.
Sovereignty was to be pooled. If the UK was still an EU member state, the French would not have been able to “disinvite” the British home secretary – she’d have freedom of movement for a start.
Johnson’s pompous attempt at a billet-doux to President Macron was the immediate cause of French irritation but it is Brexit that has clearly poisoned relations.
Remainer Labour ex-Foreign Secretary David Miliband blames migrant crisis on BREXIT as he sides with Macron and condemns Boris Johnson for trying to 'infuriate' French president
A former Labour Cabinet minister today blamed the migrant crisis in the Channel on Brexit and condemned Boris Johnson for 'infuriating' Emmanuel Macron. David Miliband, chief executive of the International Rescue Committee, told Radio 4's Today programme that the Prime Minister's open letter to the French President - in which he outlined a plan to clamp down on people-smugglers sending asylum seekers across the Narrow Sea - was 'unwise'. London and Paris are engaged in yet another diplomatic spat after 27 migrants drowned off the coast of Calais when their dinghy capsized this week. President Macron, a prominent opponent of Brexit who has clashed with Mr Johnson over a range of issues including fishing rights, claimed the Prime Minister's letter was a breach of French sovereignty. He responded by dramatically disinviting Home Secretary Priti Patel from crisis talks. Speaking to the BBC, Remainer Mr Miliband said the migrant crisis is 'a graphic demonstration of what Brexit means' and appeared to take France's side in the war of words.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
Lord Kerr demolishes Priti Patel’s ‘economic migrants’ narrative with just three simple facts
ALASTAIR CAMPBELL @campbellclaret ‘The facts do not support the case for cruelty.’ Every word of this. Please take four minutes of your day to watch Lord Kerr expose the Johnson Patel lying stance for the sado-populism it is.
French presidential hopeful Michel Barnier vows to TEAR UP border treaty with Britain and let ALL migrants travel to the UK to claim asylum after 'petulant' Macron's bust-up with Boris over tragedy that killed 27
The EU's former Brexit negotiator has dramatically urged France to tear up its migrant treaty with Britain and send asylum-seekers across the Channel as tensions between London and Paris boil over. Michel Barnier, who harbours hopes of challenging Emmanuel Macron in next year's presidential elections, called on the French government to pull out of the Treaty of Touquet governing Anglo-French border relations. Under the terms of the agreement struck in 2003, each country has immigration control points at Dover and Calais. Britain is responsible for financing and running security at its border sites in northern France. In return, it is up to France to stop migrants trying to enter the UK illegally. Mr Barnier's extraordinary intervention comes amid yet another Anglo-French diplomatic spat over the deaths of 27 migrants who drowned off the coast of Calais after their dinghy capsized this week.
Boris Johnson scrambling to save leadership with drinks parties for furious MPs
And this Tuesday the Sunday Mirror understands the PM will host MPs elected in 2010 and before - which includes many of the so-called “awkward squad” - rebellious Tory MPs who are tiring of Mr Johnson’s “clown act.”
“Nobody’s laughing any more,” said one.
The Sunday Mirror understands a number of Tory MPs are waiting to see how Mr Johnson handles Tuesday’s reception before submitting their letters to Sir Graham.
A Whitehall insider said Mr Johnson had been motivated to try and win a second election, to prove he was not a “one hit wonder” - and could beat a Labour leader other than Jeremy Corbyn.
They added: “Maybe he's going to miss that chance now.”
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
'We told French police that our boat was sinking. They said we were in British waters, so we rang the British... and they told us to call the French': The shocking account of one of the two survivors of the Channel migrant tragedy
Mohammed Shekha (left), 21, detailed a shocking series of desperate calls to French and British authorities and claimed both denied responsibility for the rescue. At least 27 people drowned as they headed for the UK last Wednesday. Last night, Mr Shekha, one of only two survivors, said the boat's occupants held each other's hands in the water before succumbing to the icy sea. In an interview with Rudaw, the Kurdish state broadcaster, he said 33 people went to the shore near Dunkirk at 8pm on Tuesday. The young shepherd, whose family live in northern Iraq, said some migrants wanted to swim to the ship. At that point, a 16-year-old Iraqi boy called Mubin Hussein (top right), who was on board with his mother and two sisters, made desperate phone calls for help. Mubin was on board with his mother Kazhal Ahmed, 45, and two sisters Haida, 22, and Hasti, seven. They are all feared dead. Mr Shekha, whose family moved to Iraq from Iran a decade ago, said he needed to raise $60,000 [£45,000] to pay for an operation for his younger sister, Fatima (bottom right). Asked whether he still wanted to go to Britain, he said: 'I will do whatever it takes for my sister.'
Comments
There is no need to police a huge coastline.
Once it became common knowledge that all illegals would be returned, crossings would stop.
If the EU introduced similar legislation it would help everyone.
If the EU said that asylum seekers had to remain in the first safe country they reached, but could apply for asylum wherever they wanted to go.
The current system is probably unfair to Spain, Italy, and Greece.
Any illegals found travelling through Europe, could be sent to Turkey.
Any failed applicants could be sent to Turkey.
Applications should be dealt with within 6 months.
Suddenly the whole problem is under control.
Including the French problem which would no longer exist.
The 17-strong executive of the 1922 Committee had talks with the Prime Minister this afternoon amid an alarming slump in his popularity with voters.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10242989/Spectator-names-Rishi-Sunak-parliamentarian-year-new-sign-Chancellors-political-rise.html
Typically, people talk about "arithmetic density"-which is area divided by population. But that is totally inaccurate in relation to any measure as to what a country could/should be doing in relation to migrants, having regard to population density.
The 2 far more relevant statistics take into account 2 other important factors. Firstly, it says that we should disregard areas where absolutely no-one lives. If there are 0 people living in a square kilometre, the reason is simple-that square kilometre cannot support human life. Hence "lived density" is far more important than simple area. To give an extreme example, Western Australia is the size of Western Europe. But, with the exception of one corner of WA, the rest of that huge area has next to no people in it.
The 2nd example shows the most densely populated part of each country. On both counts (for example) Spain has a massively higher "built up density", because large parts of Spain do not have anyone living in them.
One interesting part of this study shows that the different parts of the UK show massively different abilities to support an increased population.
Out of the 39 European countries in the study, England had the 6th highest built up density. And 3 of the countries above it were tiny (Monaco/Andorra/Malta). Compare and contrast with the rest of the UK-Wales 24th, Scotland 25th, and Northern Ireland 31st. All with lived in density of way less than 50% of England.
to give 1 example, Scotland has more than half the size of England. Due to the Borders and Highlands/Islands having different geographical features to England, less than half of Scotland's area can support life in comparison to England. So-you might assume on those figures that Scotland would have a population of 20-25% of England. But it is less than 10% (5 million to 52 million).
Made me think.
https://theconversation.com/think-your-country-is-crowded-these-maps-reveal-the-truth-about-population-density-across-europe-90345
HM Revenue and Customs has struck a deal to relocate tax officials into a new office complex in Newcastle owned by major Conservative party donors through an offshore company based in a tax haven, the Guardian can reveal.
The department’s planned new home in the north-east of England is part of a regeneration scheme developed by a British Virgin Islands (BVI) entity controlled by the billionaire property tycoons David and Simon Reuben.
The deal will see officials at the government department responsible for preventing tax avoidance working from a site owned by a subsidiary of a company based in a secretive offshore tax jurisdiction.
The Reuben brothers, their family members and businesses have donated a combined £1.9m to the Tories. Earlier this week, the brothers are reported to have shared a table with Boris Johnson at an exclusive Tory party fundraising dinner.
On Tuesday, officials including the Cabinet Office minister Steve Barclay announced HMRC had agreed the 25-year lease with one of the Reuben brothers’ companies.
The brothers are the second richest family in the UK, according to the Sunday Times’s rich list. David Reuben’s son, Jamie, is a close ally of the prime minister and has served as a Tory party treasurer. He has donated more than £750,000 to the party since Johnson entered Downing Street.
The Reuben family has built a significant presence in Newcastle in recent years and is part of the controversial Saudi Arabia-led consortium that acquired Newcastle United football club in October.
Company filings show the family has frequently used BVI companies to hold its UK business interests, which include a luxury London property portfolio and a string of racecourses.
Combatting offshore tax evasion and avoidance is described as one of HMRC’s priorities and earlier this year the department unveiled plans to crack down on offshore tax avoidance by targeting UK-based entities facilitating the sale of avoidance schemes using tax havens.
Responding to the move, Dame Margaret Hodge, a Labour MP and chair of the cross-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, said: “It’s outrageous that HMRC should be using taxpayers’ money to benefit somebody that relies on offshore structures based in tax havens.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brexit-means-you-chose-to-give-up-migrant-returns-france-tells-boris-johnson/ar-AARb2iK?ocid=msedgntp
There is some irony in the fact that about the only person the French are not allowing into their country right now is Priti Patel. In an unusually blunt diplomatic snub, her day trip to Calais on Sunday has been cancelled – and so have the scheduled face-to-face talks with the French authorities about the loss of life in the English Channel.
One hopes they’ll still pick up the phone for her but you never know. Given the enormity of what has happened, it seems a bit impetuous – childish, even – banning Patel from her own meeting but it does go to show how dreadful Anglo-French relations have become and how weak the UK is.
Apparently the French didn’t like the tone of Boris Johnson’s letter to the president of the republic, nor that he shoved it out on Twitter. That is not how such things should be done Monsieur Johnson, they were telling him, and they have a point.
It’s maybe not the first time Johnson’s had a bit of trouble with a French letter but the tone was all wrong. Johnson – of all people – was offering his sage advice on how they should be running their backward little country.
They don’t really need that and they don’t really want to enact his helpful suggestion that they let the British patrol their borders for them, seeing as they can’t be bothered.
After all, the job of any country’s border force is to stop people getting in, not so much to prevent them from lawfully leaving. As Macron says, these people do not wish to live in France and he cannot make them.
Rather tellingly, the French explained that the British ideas are unacceptable because they violated the “sovereignty” of France. Whoever is at fault in this, it seems plain that nothing will be done as a result of the tragedy this week and the people who will suffer from this spat are the refugees still attempting a Channel crossing in flimsy boats and worsening weather; more will die.
You have to admit that Brexit has not helped. Like so many divorces where the participants believe that it’s all going to be quite amicable, leaving the EU was always going to be acrimonious – and so it has proved.
Within the EU’s structures, the British and the French had to talk to one another and the other EU partners involved in the migrant crisis – such as Italy, Malta and Greece and now Poland and Lithuania.
We did have the Dublin Regulation system for pan-EU migrant returns, which may not have been perfect but was at least some sort of agreement. Now, there is none.
Where once Britain could exert influence and some power over EU migration policy and what was happening “upstream” in the Mediterranean and policy towards Turkey, the British now have next to no say.
The old concept of shared sovereignty meant that the British would no longer have complete control over their own borders but in return would have a say on the border regime across the whole continent, which was of some use. At the moment, the British have no say over anyone else’s border policies and little practical control of their own.
The migrant crisis is bigger than Britain and indeed bigger than Britain and France. It is precisely the kind of thing that demands action at a supranational scale. This was what was going to be happening over the weekend, when Patel was going to swap ideas and contacts with counterparts from a half dozen other European countries – just like the old days in an EU Council of Ministers meeting.
Sovereignty was to be pooled. If the UK was still an EU member state, the French would not have been able to “disinvite” the British home secretary – she’d have freedom of movement for a start.
Johnson’s pompous attempt at a billet-doux to President Macron was the immediate cause of French irritation but it is Brexit that has clearly poisoned relations.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/voices-real-reason-priti-patel-113209531.html
Winston! Entente Cordiale - NOW '
A former Labour Cabinet minister today blamed the migrant crisis in the Channel on Brexit and condemned Boris Johnson for 'infuriating' Emmanuel Macron. David Miliband, chief executive of the International Rescue Committee, told Radio 4's Today programme that the Prime Minister's open letter to the French President - in which he outlined a plan to clamp down on people-smugglers sending asylum seekers across the Narrow Sea - was 'unwise'. London and Paris are engaged in yet another diplomatic spat after 27 migrants drowned off the coast of Calais when their dinghy capsized this week. President Macron, a prominent opponent of Brexit who has clashed with Mr Johnson over a range of issues including fishing rights, claimed the Prime Minister's letter was a breach of French sovereignty. He responded by dramatically disinviting Home Secretary Priti Patel from crisis talks. Speaking to the BBC, Remainer Mr Miliband said the migrant crisis is 'a graphic demonstration of what Brexit means' and appeared to take France's side in the war of words.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10248717/David-Miliband-blames-migrant-crisis-row-Brexit-sides-Macron.html
ALASTAIR CAMPBELL
@campbellclaret
‘The facts do not support the case for cruelty.’ Every word of this. Please take four minutes of your day to watch Lord Kerr expose the Johnson Patel lying stance for the sado-populism it is.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/lord-kerr-demolishes-priti-patel-s-economic-migrants-narrative-with-just-three-simple-facts/ar-AARcHyK?ocid=msedgntp
The EU's former Brexit negotiator has dramatically urged France to tear up its migrant treaty with Britain and send asylum-seekers across the Channel as tensions between London and Paris boil over. Michel Barnier, who harbours hopes of challenging Emmanuel Macron in next year's presidential elections, called on the French government to pull out of the Treaty of Touquet governing Anglo-French border relations. Under the terms of the agreement struck in 2003, each country has immigration control points at Dover and Calais. Britain is responsible for financing and running security at its border sites in northern France. In return, it is up to France to stop migrants trying to enter the UK illegally. Mr Barnier's extraordinary intervention comes amid yet another Anglo-French diplomatic spat over the deaths of 27 migrants who drowned off the coast of Calais after their dinghy capsized this week.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10249005/Michel-Barnier-wades-Channel-row-urging-France-TEAR-border-treaty-Britain.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/boris-johnson-planning-to-scrap-human-rights-act-reform-needed/ar-AARcLk4?ocid=msedgntp
And this Tuesday the Sunday Mirror understands the PM will host MPs elected in 2010 and before - which includes many of the so-called “awkward squad” - rebellious Tory MPs who are tiring of Mr Johnson’s “clown act.”
“Nobody’s laughing any more,” said one.
The Sunday Mirror understands a number of Tory MPs are waiting to see how Mr Johnson handles Tuesday’s reception before submitting their letters to Sir Graham.
A Whitehall insider said Mr Johnson had been motivated to try and win a second election, to prove he was not a “one hit wonder” - and could beat a Labour leader other than Jeremy Corbyn.
They added: “Maybe he's going to miss that chance now.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/boris-johnson-scrambling-to-save-leadership-with-drinks-parties-for-furious-mps/ar-AARcqwy?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/dan-hodges-the-tory-nightmare-someone-shouts-brexiteers-assemble/ar-AARcO0S?ocid=msedgntp
Mohammed Shekha (left), 21, detailed a shocking series of desperate calls to French and British authorities and claimed both denied responsibility for the rescue. At least 27 people drowned as they headed for the UK last Wednesday. Last night, Mr Shekha, one of only two survivors, said the boat's occupants held each other's hands in the water before succumbing to the icy sea. In an interview with Rudaw, the Kurdish state broadcaster, he said 33 people went to the shore near Dunkirk at 8pm on Tuesday. The young shepherd, whose family live in northern Iraq, said some migrants wanted to swim to the ship. At that point, a 16-year-old Iraqi boy called Mubin Hussein (top right), who was on board with his mother and two sisters, made desperate phone calls for help. Mubin was on board with his mother Kazhal Ahmed, 45, and two sisters Haida, 22, and Hasti, seven. They are all feared dead. Mr Shekha, whose family moved to Iraq from Iran a decade ago, said he needed to raise $60,000 [£45,000] to pay for an operation for his younger sister, Fatima (bottom right). Asked whether he still wanted to go to Britain, he said: 'I will do whatever it takes for my sister.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10252099/One-two-survivors-migrants-tragedy-Channel-gives-shocking-account-horror.html