• The post you are reporting:
   
  If I'm keeping you entertained Pablo, then so be it.
  
  The point that seems to have raised dear Reggie's hackles is, I think, a Brexit related one. Sorry to use the dreaded word. Brexit that is, not Reggie.
  
  We have returned failed asylum seekers to other EU countries since this whole issue began way back 2 decades ago. Primarily this has been to France. My point was that there will no continuing ability to do so from Jan. 1st 2012 unless a future agreement is reached.
  
  Reg - you dismissed this by saying ' it is also contingent on the third country of asylum (UK) ensuring that the designated first country of asylum (France) will re-admit the applicant.
  Plus the fact that France have not transposed Article 26( the relevant bit) into national legislation and it remains an optional provision'.
  
  That's misdirection. Our French friends have been accepting returned refugees for years. Various current cabinet ministers have been at pains to point this out recently. After Jan 1st. there is a good chance that they will no longer to do so. That's not guff, it's a fact and a consequence of our leaving the Dublin protocol.
  
  I'm quite happy to enter into a reasoned debate about the other points I raised. If you think that Laughing Boy has made a great success of handling this pandemic, then I'd love to hear your case. Maybe there is an ethical motive in kicking out Julian Lewis and not Ma (sorry) not the alleged rapist. Maybe all this PPE procurement has been an exercise in probity that could not be questioned. Please tell me why I have got these aspects so badly wrong.
  
  I'd be delighted to hear your arguments rather than just describing it all as guff.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason