Exclusive: France expects UK to pay up, take more refugees to keep border - official

[webfact]

Exclusive: France expects UK to pay up, take more refugees to keep border - official

By Matthias Blamont

 

Migrant walks past the fence which secures the approach to the city from migrants trying to reach Britain, in Calais, France, September 21, 2016. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol

 

PARIS (Reuters) - France expects Britain to agree to take more asylum seekers and pay more for border security in order to maintain a frontier on the French side of the Channel, a French government official said.

 

Britain's border was extended into France under a 2003 bilateral treaty known as the Le Touquet accord. But a migration crisis and the Brexit vote to leave the European Union have made the arrangement an increasing source of friction.

 

The deal will be on the table on Thursday when President Emmanuel Macron holds talks with British Prime Minister Theresa May at a Anglo-French summit in southern England.

 

Asked if concrete announcements are expected at the talks, the source said: "Yes. But is it all finalised? Absolutely not."

 

France's Interior Minister Gerard Collomb, who has taken the lead on talks, was quoted by the Le Parisen newspaper on Sunday saying he hoped an "additional protocol" to supplement the Le Touquet accord could be agreed upon.

 

His comments indicated Macron has dropped a campaign promise to renegotiate the Le Touquet accord in full.

 

"We're still negotiating. There is back and forth. Nothing is locked in yet. The British have shaken on nothing but there's a lot of pressure on them," said the official familiar with Collomb's thinking.

 

If no deal can be struck, France could tear up the Le Touquet accord and the two countries would have to reinstate borders on each side of the English Channel, the source said, adding that this was not in the interest of either side.

 

"Our understanding is that they will pay more. The question is how much and for what," said the source, adding that the two sides are in daily contact ahead of the summit.

 

"We have let them know of our needs and a figure, we're talking tens of millions of euros."

 

Some pro-Brexit lawmakers from Britain's ruling Conservative party have branded suggestions London pay more as "absurd".

 

A spokesman for the British Home Office (interior ministry) said: "We work closely with the French authorities at all levels to reduce migrant pressures and target criminal gangs involved in people trafficking, both in northern France and further afield."

 

DETENTION CENTRE, REPATRIATIONS

 

Macron will travel to Britain two days after visiting the northern port city of Calais, the final stopping point for migrants striving to cross the English Channel.

 

Calais has borne the brunt of the migration crisis in France and at its peak up to 10,000 migrants squatted in a sprawling camp dubbed "The Jungle", before former president Francois Hollande sent in bulldozers.

 

Paris has complained that it shoulders too much of the financial burden and handles more than its share of asylum cases, while Macron said in 2016 before becoming president that there would be no migrants in Calais if the accord unravelled.

 

Britain had paid 140 million euros (124.54 million pounds) in the past three years towards border and security infrastructure, but that this needed to be increased in the future, the official, who declined to be named, told Reuters.

 

Other options included Britain co-financing a detention centre for illegal migrants, organising repatriation flights and assisting with expulsions, the source said.

 

France is also asking for legal provisions to ensure Britain accepts more refugees, the official said, adding that it could take more unaccompanied minors under the terms of EU rules.

 

Macron has come under fire over legislation his government is drafting to speed up the processing of asylum demands and help it expel illegal migrants who do not have a legitimate cause for refugee status.

 

(Reporting by Matthias Blamont, with additional reporting by Elizabeth Piper in London and Richard Lough in Paris; writing by Richard Lough; editing by Alexander Smith)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-01-15

[steve187]

it never ends with the demands from across the channel

[davehowden]

" France is also asking for legal provisions to ensure Britain accepts more refugees "

 

Ha ha, good luck with that one Monsieur Baguette.

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, steve187 said:

it never ends with the demands from across the channel

I'd be fascinated to hear a brexier's justification for the UK having a border being the EU once Brexit goes into effect.  Would you approve of the EU border being extended into post-Brexit UK? Doublethink much?

[isaanbanhou]

Macron steals an idea from the small handed racist.

[bert bloggs]

How about France doesnt let them in in the first place ,Talk to Merkal ,Macron ,not us .

[bert bloggs]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

Dealing with mass migrations can be expensive.  Interesting to see which countries are the strongest magnets.  Germany, Sweden and Britain.

 

To get closer to a longer term policy, I suggest Europeans try to encourage a zero-population-growth policies in source countries.   It would me met with howls of racism, etc. ....but it's got to be started sometime in the future.

 

China did a similar thing in recent decades, with its 'one family, one child' policy.

 

Free condoms, no questions asked, for all ages, ....would be a start.

 

Additionally, tube tying provided free by medical clinics - for any man or woman.

 

Later, (and this would be v. controversial) forced sterilization for any man or woman who has sired two children.   

 

 

There is not much that can be done ,the way the worlds populations are growing ,the world as we knew it is finished , only Billions dying will save what is left .

[steve187]

53 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I'd be fascinated to hear a brexier's justification for the UK having a border being the EU once Brexit goes into effect.  Would you approve of the EU border being extended into post-Brexit UK? Doublethink much?

its a very porous border now, lets make the border a stretch of sea, kept the Germans out before.

EU rules say all immigrant should be dealt with in the first country they reach, the UK is at the end of a line of countries they have crossed.

[boomerangutang]

6 minutes ago, steve187 said:

its a very porous border now, lets make the border a stretch of sea, kept the Germans out before.

EU rules say all immigrant should be dealt with in the first country they reach, the UK is at the end of a line of countries they have crossed.

That makes it particularly tough for Italy and Greece.

Yet Spain and Hungary (also border countries) are doing a rather good job of keeping the tide at bay.

 

It looks as tho the UK is a desirable destination for large portions of economic migrants.  Could UK's lax policies on giving welfare be a factor?   Methinks yes.

[Enoon]

9 minutes ago, steve187 said:

its a very porous border now, lets make the border a stretch of sea, kept the Germans out before.

EU rules say all immigrant should be dealt with in the first country they reach, the UK is at the end of a line of countries they have crossed.

 

The migration thing is a neglected factor (not really an issue pre-UK accession to the EU/removal of Iron Curtain).

 

Given the extent to which xenophobia influenced the vote, the real consequences of Britain going it alone (in respect of migration) have, paradoxically, been the least considered.

 

No reason for ex-partners to co-operate and allow the UK security enclaves within their borders, or hold up those seeking to get to the UK.

 

No Spanish or French Navy to intercept ships which will be arriving in the Channel direct from the countries of migration origin.

 

Britain will be wide open without considerable goodwill from its ex-partners.

 

PS  "Kept the Germans out"......nostalgic, fantasy version of UK capability 2018+.  "Eggs in One Basket" Navy (not a home waters patrol one) for a start. 

 

 

 

[Moonlover]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

Dealing with mass migrations can be expensive.  Interesting to see which countries are the strongest magnets.  Germany, Sweden and Britain.

 

To get closer to a longer term policy, I suggest Europeans try to encourage a zero-population-growth policies in source countries.   It would me met with howls of racism, etc. ....but it's got to be started sometime in the future.

 

China did a similar thing in recent decades, with its 'one family, one child' policy.

 

Free condoms, no questions asked, for all ages, ....would be a start.

 

Additionally, tube tying provided free by medical clinics - for any man or woman.

 

Later, (and this would be v. controversial) forced sterilization for any man or woman who has sired two children.   

 

 

Unfortunately, The prime example that you give, China's 'one child policy', has resulted in both gender inequality and an unhealthy bulge at the top of the 'population by age' pyramid and is now being discarded by the Chinese authorities.

 

The rest of your suggestions all have human rights issues.

 

It has now been well established that good education and economic growth, resulting in a raise in the overall living standards are key to both the lowering of birth rates and reducing the urge to migrate.

 

Good governance is, of course vital, if such goals are to be achieved. 

 

 

[RuamRudy]

5 hours ago, steve187 said:

it never ends with the demands from across the channel

From the French perspective? Why should the French spend money trying to provide a barrier to suit the needs of the British? Unless we are adopting some Trumpian logic, UK border security is the responsibility of the British government.

[farcanell]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

From the French perspective? Why should the French spend money trying to provide a barrier to suit the needs of the British? Unless we are adopting some Trumpian logic, UK border security is the responsibility of the British government.

Which country are the migrants in?

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Which country are the migrants in?

It's there in the article - scroll to the top of the page and you will see for yourself.

[farcanell]

8 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's there in the article - scroll to the top of the page and you will see for yourself

Lol.... subtly was lost....  the migrants are on French soil, so it’s largely their problem, which they are pushing onto western neighbors.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, farcanell said:

Lol.... subtly was lost....  the migrants are on French soil, so it’s largely their problem, which they are pushing onto western neighbors.

Subtlety is, indeed, a very elusive quality...

 

I still don't see your logic - they are in France because they want, for whatever reason, to get to the UK. The draw is the UK, not France. Why should France pay to control people who are only there because it is en route to Britain? If the French were ushering them westwards then I could see a justifiable complaint from the UK, but it is a British problem and the British should pay. In fact, maybe the French should demand compensation from the British for the cost of clean-up and control of the migrants as they make their way to Calais?

[dick dasterdly]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Subtlety is, indeed, a very elusive quality...

 

I still don't see your logic - they are in France because they want, for whatever reason, to get to the UK. The draw is the UK, not France. Why should France pay to control people who are only there because it is en route to Britain? If the French were ushering them westwards then I could see a justifiable complaint from the UK, but it is a British problem and the British should pay. In fact, maybe the French should demand compensation from the British for the cost of clean-up and control of the migrants as they make their way to Calais?

 

I'd refer you to bert bloggs post:-

 

 

2 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

How about France doesnt let them in in the first place ,Talk to Merkal ,Macron ,not us .

 

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I'd refer you to bert bloggs post:-

 

 

 

I understand that in some post-war terraced houses in the UK, the attic space was open from one end of the street to the other. By this logic, if someone breaks into a neighbour's house then makes their way to mine via the communal attic, then I should hold my neighbour liable for any losses I should suffer. Surely the defence of my property should be up to me to organise rather than expect my neighbour to protect me?

[billd766]

52 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's there in the article - scroll to the top of the page and you will see for yourself.

 

Whose responsibility is it now they are in France?

 

The French, of course.

[farcanell]

20 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Subtlety is, indeed, a very elusive quality...

 

I still don't see your logic - they are in France because they want, for whatever reason, to get to the UK. The draw is the UK, not France. Why should France pay to control people who are only there because it is en route to Britain? If the French were ushering them westwards then I could see a justifiable complaint from the UK, but it is a British problem and the British should pay. In fact, maybe the French should demand compensation from the British for the cost of clean-up and control of the migrants as they make their way to Calais?

France is a sovereign nation, not an immigration way point.

 

context (my logic).... does the US allow South American immigrants free passage from Mexico to the Canadian border, where it houses them, whilst awaiting Canadian acceptance of the immigrants?

 

and if it does, who would be the silly buggers?

 

that said, I might agree with your assessment if Britain has agreed to take X number of refugees/ immigrants, over a specified period, but has failed to do so.

 

 

[RuamRudy]

4 minutes ago, farcanell said:

France is a sovereign nation, not an immigration way point.

 

context (my logic).... does the US allow South American immigrants free passage from Mexico to the Canadian border, where it houses them, whilst awaiting Canadian acceptance of the immigrants?

 

and if it does, who would be the silly buggers?

 

that said, I might agree with your assessment if Britain has agreed to take X number of refugees/ immigrants, over a specified period, but has failed to do so.

 

 

And all that makes sense - but look how the world scoffed at Trump's suggestion that Mexico pay for his wall. Outside Trump's world there is no expectation on Mexico to secure US borders - similarly, the UK cannot expect other countries to pay for its own defences.

[farcanell]

16 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I understand that in some post-war terraced houses in the UK, the attic space was open from one end of the street to the other. By this logic, if someone breaks into a neighbour's house then makes their way to mine via the communal attic, then I should hold my neighbour liable for any losses I should suffer. Surely the defence of my property should be up to me to organise rather than expect my neighbour to protect me?

I see your point.... nicely done

 

but... instead perhaps consider that your neighbor has given free access to the attic space, for all and sundry to use.

 

Who then is in the wrong?

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, farcanell said:

I see your point.... nicely done

 

but... instead perhaps consider that your neighbor has given free access to the attic space, for all and sundry to use.

 

Who then is in the wrong?

Ideally, the neighbour will have secured his property such that it wasn't vulnerable - and I would certainly be p&ssed off with him if he had been lax in doing so. However, I still feel that despite that, it is my responsibility to ensure no unauthorised access to my property.

[farcanell]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

And all that makes sense - but look how the world scoffed at Trump's suggestion that Mexico pay for his wall. Outside Trump's world there is no expectation on Mexico to secure US borders - similarly, the UK cannot expect other countries to pay for its own defences.

The article says that Britain has contributed nearly 50million euro a year in payments, which is a lot of money, when your talking largely about stopping people from entering a small tunnel.

 

britain would spend even more money, on its own accord, to protect the other 95% of its borders.... 

[farcanell]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

Ideally, the neighbour will have secured his property such that it wasn't vulnerable - and I would certainly be p&ssed off with him if he had been lax in doing so. However, I still feel that despite that, it is my responsibility to ensure no unauthorised access to my property.

Yep... agree

and per last, Britain is doing just that, which is why France has a problem.... France was lax, and has let immigrants sneak across its attic.

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Yep... agree

and per last, Britain is doing just that, which is why France has a problem.... France was lax, and has let immigrants sneak across its attic.

In this case, as the open border policy is Europe wide, I guess that the lax neighbour was the EU rather than France? If I was a bloody-minded Frenchman I might complain that all these illegal immigrants flocking across my country trying to get to the Chunnel are doing so because of the British - and that the British should do something at source to stop these people trying to get there.

[evadgib]

If France wasn't so porous in the first place brexit would never have came about. 

[farcanell]

 

“Britain is it? Take the door to the right... good chap... next”

 

[midas]

2 hours ago, Moonlover said:

Unfortunately, The prime example that you give, China's 'one child policy', has resulted in both gender inequality and an unhealthy bulge at the top of the 'population by age' pyramid and is now being discarded by the Chinese authorities.

 

The rest of your suggestions all have human rights issues.

 

It has now been well established that good education and economic growth, resulting in a raise in the overall living standards are key to both the lowering of birth rates and reducing the urge to migrate.

 

Good governance is, of course vital, if such goals are to be achieved. 

 

 

" good education and economic growth, resulting in a raise in the overall living standards are key to both the lowering of birth rates and reducing the urge to migrate."

 

You must be talking about that country called Utopia because I don't see any of the things you have mentioned happening-particularly a rise in living standards as long as robots and artificial intelligence  increasingly compete with human labour.

[dick dasterdly]

42 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

In this case, as the open border policy is Europe wide, I guess that the lax neighbour was the EU rather than France? If I was a bloody-minded Frenchman I might complain that all these illegal immigrants flocking across my country trying to get to the Chunnel are doing so because of the British - and that the British should do something at source to stop these people trying to get there.

 

Which brings us back to:-

 

3 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

How about France doesnt let them in in the first place ,Talk to Merkal ,Macron ,not us .

 

Another poster also made the good point that economic migrants believe that the UK is better - hence the desire of so many to reach the UK....  

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by dick dasterdly