X

There may be trouble ahead. (again).

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
Apparently the U.K. want the EU to be responsible for controlling the border between Gib and Spain.

The EU think it should be Spain.

Curious that the U.K. seems to want the EU to be more involved. And even more curious that the EU wants to leave it to Spain given the EU’s apparent objective of Total European Domination.
 

Tangojoe

Well-known member
This is all about the EU reneging on a last minute agreement in the trade talks on 31 December last. They are now insisting that Spanish border guards should be stationed at Gibraltar’s port, airport and waters to enforce the bloc’s rules and that they should have the right to enter the territory to apprehend people and do other enforcement work and carry out surveillance there under EU rules. They say it's about cooperation and not sovereignty or jurisdiction. The UK says that's bollocks. No way is the UK going to allow Spanish police to wander in and out of Gibraltar. And of course, the most important people in this, those who live there, say there is no possibility of this forming the basis for an agreement. The bottom line is that Spain wants Gibraltar and of course the EC wants Spain to have it too. Just more provocation.
 

Suddickbender

Well-known member
I can understand the requirement for EU customs checks/people/personnel ….. its a prequel to getting the same between NI & Eire, if the customs posts are EU and not UK / Eire then there will be no objections ?
 

Curryman

Well-known member
'They are now insisting that Spanish border guards should be stationed at Gibraltar’s port, airport and waters to enforce the bloc’s rules and that they should have the right to enter the territory to apprehend people and do other enforcement work and carry out surveillance there under EU rules.'

This, at the same time as the EU, is now refusing to co-operate on crimes committed by their own population or sharing any information about criminality or terror threats with the UK.

You couldn't make it up.
 

Shandypants

Well-known member
The EU is a rules based organisation. The UK wanted to leave but think that the EU will waiver rules by acting in a derogatory and insulting manner *see Ireland....
The brexit ultras will never be happy. Nothing is ever enough, whether it be keeping the £ or trying to renage on the deal THEY signed, political cakeism is for idiots, incapable of distinguishing fantasy from realty. Bunch of cranks should be driven out, not running the show. They are always the victim....
 

Kurtan

Well-known member
Gib voted remain 96% to 4%.
Seems they knew all along what the consequences were likely to be of Brexit
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
'They are now insisting that Spanish border guards should be stationed at Gibraltar’s port, airport and waters to enforce the bloc’s rules and that they should have the right to enter the territory to apprehend people and do other enforcement work and carry out surveillance there under EU rules.'

This, at the same time as the EU, is now refusing to co-operate on crimes committed by their own population or sharing any information about criminality or terror threats with the UK.

You couldn't make it up.
We opted out of the data sharing with Europol when we left the EU. The EU is abiding by our request.
 

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
The EU is a rules based organisation. The UK wanted to leave but think that the EU will waiver rules by acting in a derogatory and insulting manner *see Ireland....
The brexit ultras will never be happy. Nothing is ever enough, whether it be keeping the £ or trying to renage on the deal THEY signed, political cakeism is for idiots, incapable of distinguishing fantasy from realty. Bunch of cranks should be driven out, not running the show. They are always the victim....

The EU certainly is a Rules based organisation. It agreed rules with the UK on how Gibraltar should be dealt with. Now it wants to apply its own rules. It seems to be you who is struggling to distinguish fantasy from realty.
 

Shandypants

Well-known member
The EU certainly is a Rules based organisation. It agreed rules with the UK on how Gibraltar should be dealt with. Now it wants to apply its own rules. It seems to be you who is struggling to distinguish fantasy from realty.
Really, crikey you lot are proper shape shifters aren't you. Wow this govt arw so honest and up front, they're british upper class with stiff upper lips. Anyway it taken this article below which is interesting:

This is likely to change radically. The plan is that Gibraltar’s port and airport become the new frontier of Schengen. Those arriving from the UK will have their documents checked; those coming from one of the 22 EU/Schengen countries won’t. Rubbing in the point, the men and women checking the documents of British visitors will be members of the EU’s border guard, Frontex. There’s a row brewing over whether Gibraltar will become a part of Schengen or be merely connected to it, but the direction of travel is clear enough.

The joint statement attempts to sound tough stating that ‘a joint operation’ with Frontex will only initially last for four years, and will stop if Spain, the UK or Gibraltar don’t like the way it is working.

You would have thought that checks of their beloved blue passports might be enough to give Brexiteers apoplexy – but it doesn’t end there. In this topsy turvy world while the UK has now left the customs union, Gibraltar will join it for the very first time.

The new closer relationship with the EU isn’t likely to end there – it is almost inevitable that its VAT regime and trade regulations will be extended to the Rock for the first time.

Gibraltar’s chief minister Picardo notes the irony that the Rock is likely to have a closer relationship with the EU than it ever did during the 48 years when it, and the UK, were members of the club. He tells me: “Ironically post Brexit we and the region around us may enjoy greater certainty about the fluidity of goods and people but I don’t think that changes what you might call our spiritual identity.”

Although Spain has signed up to the proposed plan, the whole EU isn’t yet formally involved. The treaty is meant to be done and dusted by the end of June but this seems unlikely – the EU's rather frosty statement merely points out “the relevant services in the Commission are currently examining the request in view of proposing the next steps in line with the Commission Declaration on possible Future Arrangements between the Union and the UK in respect of Gibraltar”.

If they are in no rush, the UK has to put up with it. The foreign secretary has suggested getting it right is more important than sticking to a timetable, so he will be flexible.

****

There’s a warning from history – the Treaty of Utrecht was only partially agreed in 1713 – it took another two years to be completed. More worrying than a slipping time table is what might go wrong.

In the current atmosphere even the easy things are likely to prove difficult. Some assumed with Brexit a reality and the basic deal done the hard words would be forgotten and a new business like relationship would prevail. The reverse appears to be true – predictably on both sides of the relationship there’s an assumption of antagonism.

From the suspension of the Northern Ireland protocol and the refusal to grant the EU ambassador full diplomatic rights, to the appointment of Lord Frost to the cabinet, through the new low of the unseemly row over vaccines, the atmosphere has got steadily worse. Asked about this new potential for friction by Gibraltarian journalists Raab seemed sanguine – he said the stumbling blocks had been mostly dealt with in the framework agreement. Still, there's more potential for take than give – privately everyone involved recognises the fraught relationship between the UK and the EU will make a difficult job harder still. But when I ask the chief minister if he is worried, he is diplomatic: “Given how Gibraltar and Spain have unfortunately caused difficulties for Brussels in the past I’m sure they won’t want to waste the opportunity, where there is an agreement between us, to clinch that in treaty form.”

He adds: “The issues that Brexit has made us grapple with have been as difficult as we imagined at the time of the vote but we can see an opportunity for Gibraltar to flourish despite our departure from the European Union – I will work very hard to make the Brexit I didn’t want, the success those who did, highlighted it might be.”

****

The only other place under British rule to share a land border with an EU country is of course Northern Ireland where history makes the issue of borders even more fraught. It is leaving the customs union while the neighbouring EU member, the Republic of Ireland naturally stays in (neither have ever been part of Schengen). With the great fear that a hard border – with customs checks and the like – could lead to political violence, the solution, currently causing a huge row, is the awkward notion of customs check’s ‘in the Irish Sea’, in other words between one part of the UK and another.

Would the planned Gib deal be another answer? Hardly. The big difference is that Gibraltar’s citizens do at least seem to share a common vision – while almost 96% voted to remain in the EU, in 2002 99% also voted to stay exclusively British. The duality of what is on offer for the Rock would clearly divide in Northern Ireland, by reinforcing its separateness from Great Britain, and underscoring its closeness to Ireland.

The risks for Gibraltar are obviously less serious even if it all goes wrong.

But it is a long time since the Rock has been about hard power and practical advantage – it’s potency lies what it stands for – a hollow drum to beat to rally the troops. This is the price of Brexit, the British holding fast to their pride in possession, content to pay the price of the EU extending the reach of one of its most precious policies –the freedom of movement within its borders.

When ever the new treaty is signed don’t expect a future Trevelyan to suggest it cements “the maritime, commercial and financial supremacy of Great Britain” in the post Brexit world.
 

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
We opted out of the data sharing with Europol when we left the EU. The EU is abiding by our request.

What does it matter having criminals moving to and from the UK with impunity? Better to promote murder and rape rather than avoid it by sharing intelligence. After all, what do a few killings, drug deals and frauds matter if they allow the UK to be punished for leaving the EU
 

glasshalffull

Well-known member
In defiance of common sense our Government was hell bent on withdrawing from so many useful exercises in mutual cooperation with seemingly little thought for the long term consequences of their actions.
There was no need for much of this even to fulfil their Brexit goals, and it was presumably done for short term political headlines and to pander to the hardline Nationalists amongst their supporters.
Time for humble pie, finding pragmatic and diplomatic solutions, and ceasing to try and place all the blame for their actions on the French, Germans or the EU.
Fat chance it would seem 😔.
 
Last edited:

Recidivist3

Well-known member
As Wiz wrote, Bojo and Co decided that they didn’t want to be a part of any EU Agency after Brexit and opted out of Europol. They only joined it at the end of 2014, five years after it had restarted.

Tangnot’s fine imitation of Trumpspeak is alarming to say the least. Does he really believe what he’s written. Hopefully the U.K. govt will go grovelling back to the eu, probably when they think no-one is looking and beg to be allowed to rejoin, hopefully at some exorbitant cost to ourselves.
 

Tangojoe

Well-known member
As Wiz wrote, Bojo and Co decided that they didn’t want to be a part of any EU Agency after Brexit and opted out of Europol. They only joined it at the end of 2014, five years after it had restarted. Tangnot’s fine imitation of Trumpspeak is alarming to say the least. Does he really believe what he’s written. Hopefully the U.K. govt will go grovelling back to the eu, probably when they think no-one is looking and beg to be allowed to rejoin, hopefully at some exorbitant cost to ourselves.

As has been said above, the UK was prevented from receiving intelligence upon leaving the EU because VDL and Macron decided that would be a price to be paid for deserting the European Project. Do you really believe we wanted to be excluded from information about dangerous criminals entering this country?
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
What does it matter having criminals moving to and from the UK with impunity? Better to promote murder and rape rather than avoid it by sharing intelligence. After all, what do a few killings, drug deals and frauds matter if they allow the UK to be punished for leaving the EU
Spot on. That’s why I thought it was lunacy that we insisted on withdrawing.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
Do you really believe we wanted to be excluded from information about dangerous criminals entering this country?
I know it sounds bonkers but that’s actually what happened. Raab insisted our security would improve if we weren’t part of the intelligence sharing. I didn’t understand his argument then and I don’t understand it now.
 

Foolweary

Well-known member
The 720° twists of logic by the Brexit camp on issues where they were foaming at the mouth to get brexit done at any cost, yet sit here today denying there was a cost could make anyone dizzy.

Now each time the arrangements are clearly to the UKs detriment, all we hear is the foreigners are cheating. When the truth is this is what the deal was all along. It's almost as if they don't want to take responsibility.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
The 720° twists of logic by the Brexit camp on issues where they were foaming at the mouth to get brexit done at any cost, yet sit here today denying there was a cost could make anyone dizzy.

Now each time the arrangements are clearly to the UKs detriment, all we hear is the foreigners are cheating. When the truth is this is what the deal was all along. It's almost as if they don't want to take responsibility.
True. But I think we knew all along they’d never accept responsibility for any problems. It’d always be someone else’s fault. And then they get cross when that’s pointed out.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
What does it matter having criminals moving to and from the UK with impunity? Better to promote murder and rape rather than avoid it by sharing intelligence. After all, what do a few killings, drug deals and frauds matter if they allow the UK to be punished for leaving the EU
Tell our Government. It was they who left the agreement to share data, not the other way round.
 

Shandypants

Well-known member
Weird how brexiteers play the blame game, when the facts are pointed out they morph into Lord Lucan and shuffle off down a tumbleweed strewn track, muttering something about bloody foreigners. Not like the good old days when those bloody foreigners did as they were told.
 

Shandypants

Well-known member
As has been said above, the UK was prevented from receiving intelligence upon leaving the EU because VDL and Macron decided that would be a price to be paid for deserting the European Project. Do you really believe we wanted to be excluded from information about dangerous criminals entering this country?
So you want everything for free, who pays for the systems? It's like the politics of school children.
One of the main benefits of EU membership was the sharing of costs rather than each individual state doing their own thing. We could have left the EU political arena but still engaged in a lot of data sharing, if we so wished and chipped in our fair share. Brexiteers will never be happy until the earth implodes, weird angry bunch that do not want to cooperate, concede anything or take responsibility for the after affects. Utter wankers.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
You don't need a legal basis to tell the authorities a consignment of drugs from France is landing at Dover tomorrow night or the Rumanian guy living at 27 High Street, Camden is a paedophile. It's how neighbouring countries all over the world operate.
It really isn't. There are protocols and legal frameworks for all data sharing.

We are a member of Interpol, but we opted out of Europol.
 

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
The point of this thread is that the EU plans to back Spain's plan to control Gibraltar's border and enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals, an action which would be illegal in any country. Not only is there no legal framework allowing such action, but it was specifically prevented in the brexit framework agreement. I don't see you supporting upholding these protocols and legal frameworks.
 
Last edited:

Wizaard

Well-known member
The point of this thread is that the EU plans to back Spain's plan to control Gibraltar's border and enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals, an action which would be illegal in any country. Not only is there no legal framework allowing such action, but it was specifically prevented in the brexit agreement. I don't see you supporting upholding these protocols and legal frameworks.
So you're against arresting criminals then? As the Gibraltarian PM says, they're now more linked to the EU than they were before Brexit as part of the single market. That includes open borders. He doesn't have an issue with it and he lives there.

As you well know, we're all too ready to ignore things in the Brexit agreement, so don't raise that as if it's sacrosanct.
 

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
So you're against arresting criminals then? As the Gibraltarian PM says, they're now more linked to the EU than they were before Brexit as part of the single market. That includes open borders. He doesn't have an issue with it and he lives there. As you well know, we're all too ready to ignore things in the Brexit agreement, so don't raise that as if it's sacrosanct.

Or, in reality, the EU has no right in law or protocol to proceed with its proposals. As Dominic Raab said, the EU’s draft mandate is not a basis for negotiation. The UK, with Gibraltar, and Spain carefully reached a pragmatic Framework Agreement, in full consultation with the EU Commission. The Commission’s proposed mandate directly conflicts with that Framework. It seeks to undermine the UK’s sovereignty over Gibraltar, and cannot form a basis for negotiations."

Gibraltar’s Chief Minister Fabian Picardo lashed out at Brussels for its hardline demands. He said: “The draft EU mandate is a matter for them, but on the basis of the current draft, there is no possibility of this forming the basis for an agreement."
 

Davepick

Well-known member
Spain have, on many occasions, delayed people driving/walking into Gibraltar for many years.
My brother, in the Royal Navy, had married quarters in Gib in the 1960s. Loved it.
Let's face it, geographically, Gib is part of Spain. however, it's been part of the British Empire since 1713.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
The point of this thread is that the EU plans to back Spain's plan to control Gibraltar's border and enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals, an action which would be illegal in any country. Not only is there no legal framework allowing such action, but it was specifically prevented in the brexit framework agreement. I don't see you supporting upholding these protocols and legal frameworks.
As far as I can see the proposal is that Spanish officials are in situ at border posts, ports and airports in Gib. A bit like the French do at St Pancras for Eurostar.

I haven’t seen anything about a right “to enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals”. Where have you got that from? Post a link please.
 

Merry Andrew

Well-known member
As far as I can see the proposal is that Spanish officials are in situ at border posts, ports and airports in Gib. A bit like the French do at St Pancras for Eurostar.

I haven’t seen anything about a right “to enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals”. Where have you got that from? Post a link please.

Wasn't that part of the EU's draft document demanding Spanish border guards to be posted at Gibraltar’s port and airport and Spanish police to enter unchallenged if in pursuit of a criminal?
 

Matesrates

Well-known member
It’s quite obvious, we’re a little country, so we need the Eu to oversee everything, laws, standards, borders (open to Eu citizens of course) plus migrants who are allowed to come to the U.K., but instead of boats, they’ll be sent first class on Eurostar.

They should decide our taxes, environmental policy, fiscal spending and relegate outdated Westminster to the status of a local council, and abolish the lords and the royal family, installing Ursula as president.

On and btw, cods off our table.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
Wasn't that part of the EU's draft document demanding Spanish border guards to be posted at Gibraltar’s port and airport and Spanish police to enter unchallenged if in pursuit of a criminal?
Yes the first part about being stationed at ports/airports etc (as the French always have been at St Pancras) but I can’t see anything about Spanish police being able to enter the island proper. All the media that I’ve seen talk about the first but not the second.

That’s why I asked for a link to be posted proving that second point but nothing has been yet.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
The point of this thread is that the EU plans to back Spain's plan to control Gibraltar's border and enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals, an action which would be illegal in any country.
I have previously asked you to post a link proving your claim that the EU wants the Spanish police to have the right to “enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals”. I asked you to do that because everything I’ve read in the media just talks about Spanish police being present at border crossings, ports and airports but nothing at all about a unilateral right to enter the territory as they choose as implied by you and Tangojoe. You haven’t posted any link but I think I’ve got to the bottom of where your claim has come from. Not surprisingly it’s not quite how you’ve represented it. First though a few facts to correct the misrepresentations that have been posted on this thread.

Gib wasn’t part of the U.K. Brexit withdrawal agreement dealing with the UK’s departure from the EU. Instead the U.K., Gib and Spain signed the framework agreement which in effect set out the ground rules for the negotiation of a new agreement between Gib and the EU. As reported in the Times this was “designed to allow Gib in effect to enter into the EU’s Schengen free movement area”. So important point - U.K. and Gib have already signed away certain concessions.

The first concession is that we’ve conceded the right for foreign law enforcement to have a presence at the ports, airports etc. The difference is that we agreed that force would be Frontex, the European border and coastguard agency. What is correct is that the EU mandate has proposed the function could be delegated to the Spanish Police rather than being carried out by Frontex. To that extent it is right to say that the EU Mandate is not in line with the framework agreement, and given the relationship between Gib and Spain I can understand why Gib would be nervous about that. However it’s nonsense to describe that it as an attack on the sovereignty and jurisdiction of Gib and the U.K. for the simple reason that we’ve already agreed to a foreign presence at ports and airports. The question is whether it’s the EU or Spanish border police.

Then there’s the question of whether Spanish police would be entitled to enter the territory at will. You’ve clearly tried to conjure up images of the Spanish police waltzing onto the island whenever they want, like some sort of jack booted gestapo. As above, I could find no mention of this in the media and you’ve failed to post a link to support your claim. As suspected your statement is complete bollux and a misrepresentation of the facts.

I suspect that the claim emanated from a minor provision in the Schengen Agreement. As reported in the Times the framework agreement signed by the U.K. and Gib was designed to allow Gib to enter into the Schengen Area. Under the Schengen Agreement police in hot pursuit of a criminal can continue their pursuit into a neighbouring country provided that’s also in the Schengen area. A very different picture to the one you’ve attempted to paint and certainly not, as you claim, “an action that would be illegal in any country”. The “hot pursuit” rule basically follows on naturally from membership of the Schengen area and is an obligation that every member accepts. If Gib is part of the area then the rule should apply to Gib as well. And (unless it was specifically excluded) it’s a principle the U.K. and Gib accepted when they signed the framework agreement. The suspicion is that, as with the NI Protocol, the government is now trying to wriggle out of the terms of the agreement it signed.
 

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
"I have previously asked you to post a link proving your claim that the EU wants the Spanish police to have the right to “enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals”.

HaHa!! Good Perry Mason impersonation. This is a football forum for expressing opinions mate. Nobody has to prove things.

I'm not sure what part of breach of sovereign rights you're pretending not to understand. The UK had a provisional framework agreement in place with the EU under which the latter would assign agents from its border agency to control the Gibraltar border. The EU has ignored that and is now proposing that Spain assumes total control of all border responsibilities, including checks on people and goods at the land border as well as asylum applications, visa applications, residence permits and police cooperation. And yes, this includes the right for Spanish police to enter the territory in pursuit of suspects.

Anyone who can't grasp the stupidity of granting a predator like Spain complete control of almost every aspect of Gib's access and egress and the effective control of every movement of goods into the territory really doesn't understand the sensitive political situation between the UK and Spain. It's equivalent to giving Argentina control of access to the Falklands.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what you or I think. The fact is that the EU's proposals were never on the table and never part of the 2020 framework agreement and both the UK and Gibraltar are not having it. So Mrs VDL can go back to her European Politics For Dummies book to find some other way of undermining the UK.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
The UK had a provisional framework agreement in place with the EU under which the latter would assign agents from its border agency to control the Gibraltar border. The EU has ignored that and is now proposing that Spain assumes total control of all border responsibilities, including checks on people and goods at the land border as well as asylum applications, visa applications, residence permits and police cooperation. And yes, this includes the right for Spanish police to enter the territory in pursuit of suspects.
We can agree there was a framework agreement although that was actually between the U.K., Gib and Spain; not the EU. Small point I suppose.

In that agreement the U.K. and Gib agreed that foreign law enforcement would have a role to play on the border and in ports and airports. So if any sovereignty has been lost then it was voluntarily surrendered by the U.K.

As I said in my post the understanding was that the Foreign police would be Frontex and as I’ve said the reference in the EU mandate is to the Spanish police, so to that extent the mandate is not in line with the framework agreement and I can under why Gib would be nervous about the Spanish given the history. So we agree on that as well even if you are being slightly hysterical about it.

Where you become even more hysterical is with your innuendo that the EU have asked for the right for the Spanish to send in Jack booted stormtroopers whenever they want. That was nonsense and you’ve been unable to post a link to anything which supports your crazy theory.

As the Times reported the framework agreement signed by U.K. and Gib was to allow Gib to join the Schengen area. Every member of that area is subject to the hot pursuit rule so it isn’t something unique to Gib and hasn’t been created just to steal the UK’s sovereignty. Unless it was excluded in the framework agreement it’s a principle the U.K. and Gib accepted when they signed the agreement.

So really once again when it comes to the EU you’ve exaggerated and distorted. Which is a shame really as it’s impossible to have a proper debate when someone posts nonsense.
 
Last edited:

tangerinenotorange

Well-known member
We can agree there was a framework agreement although that was actually between the U.K., Gib and Spain; not the EU. Small point I suppose.

In that agreement the U.K. and Gib agreed that foreign law enforcement would have a role to play on the border and in ports and airports. So if any sovereignty has been lost then it was voluntarily surrendered by the U.K.

As I said in my post the understanding was that the Foreign police would be Frontex and as I’ve said the reference in the EU mandate is to the Spanish police, so to that extent the mandate is not in line with the framework agreement and I can under why Gib would be nervous about the Spanish given the history. So we agree on that as well even if you are being slightly hysterical about it.

Where you become even more hysterical is with your innuendo that the EU have asked for the right for the Spanish to send in Jack booted stormtroopers whenever they want. That was nonsense and you’ve been unable to post a link to anything which supports your crazy theory.

As the Times reported the framework agreement signed by U.K. and Gib was to allow Gib to join the Schengen area. Every member of that area is subject to the hot pursuit rule so it isn’t something unique to Gib and hasn’t been created just to steal the UK’s sovereignty. Unless it was excluded in the framework agreement it’s a principle the U.K. and Gib accepted when they signed the agreement.

So really once again when it comes to the EU you’ve exaggerated and distorted. Which is a shame really as it’s impossible to have a proper debate when someone posts nonsense.

What a shame you had to spoil a reasonable post with your final sentence. There is no nonsense. Well apart from you thinking it's acceptable for the UK and Gibraltar to allow Spain to control Gibraltar.

I'm not sure what hysteria or innuendo you think I dreamed up. The EU proposals permit Spanish police to enter Gibraltar to pursue suspected criminals. That's not hysteria. It's fact. That is police, not jack booted stormtroopers. That's your wild imagination. What's more, were Spain to be granted control of entry and exit, visas, asylum, movement of goods, who would control the entry of Spanish police?

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. The EU has made a stupid proposal that is unacceptable to the UK, unacceptable to Gibraltar, threatens UK sovereignty and breaches the 2020 provisional framework agreement. Do you support the EU or the UK? Make your mind up.
 
Last edited:

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
What a shame you had to spoil a reasonable post with your final sentence. There is no nonsense. Well apart from you thinking it's acceptable for the UK and Gibraltar to allow Spain to control Gibraltar.

I'm not sure what hysteria or innuendo you think I dreamed up. The EU proposals permit Spanish police to enter Gibraltar to pursue suspected criminals. That's not hysteria. It's fact. That is police, not jack booted stormtroopers. That's your wild imagination. What's more, were Spain to be granted control of entry and exit, visas, asylum, movement of goods, who would control the entry of Spanish police?

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. The EU has made a stupid proposal that is unacceptable to the UK, unacceptable to Gibraltar, threatens UK sovereignty and breaches the 2020 provisional framework agreement. Do you support the EU or the UK? Make your mind up.
I haven’t said I think it’s acceptable for the U.K. and Gib “to allow Spain to control Gib”. You just made that up.

What I did say was that I agreed with you that the part of the EU Mandate that deals with foreign law enforcement at ports and airports isn’t in line with the framework agreement. In the framework agreement the U.K. and Gib surrendered a degree of sovereignty when they agreed to the EU (not Spain) having a presence via Frontex. So, even though the EU may try to dress it up as Frontex delegating the role to its “agents” (your word) the Spanish Police, I don’t think that’s very convincing.

Where we differ is over the question of foreign law enforcement having influence beyond the ports, airports etc. I’ve noticed that you’ve been reining in some of your dafter comments in recent posts although I know you’ll never agree with that. So to remind you, you began by inferring the EU wanted the Spanish police to come and go from the territory as they wished. You also claimed this was illegal and no other country would agree to it. There was no mention of that in any of the media which is why I asked you to post a link. You didn’t; I suspect because you couldn’t find anything in any sensible media that supported your claim.

As I’ve said before, I think what you were actually referring to was the hot pursuit rule in the Schengen Agreement. A rule that it seems the U.K. and Gib accepted in principle when they signed up to the framework agreement. It’s a rule that wouldn’t be unique to Gib. It applies to all Schengen members and would allow Gib police to chase criminal suspects into Spain as well as vice versa. So you’ve completely misrepresented the truth of the matter.

As for your last two sentences I’m British and support the U.K. It doesn’t follow that I must therefore accept every lie, distortion and all the jingoistic BS that the government and its supporters come out with. I want to hear the truth and then I’ll make my mind up whether one side or the other is being reasonable or a complete tosser. At the moment my feeling is the EU is being unreasonable and the government and its cheer leaders are being complete tossers.
 

tommytwojags

Well-known member
Surely the same European Commission that claims to be a a rules-based organisation and insists that the Brexit agreements aren’t up for revisiting is not planning to overturn its own agreement with the UK over Gibraltar. Unbelievable Geoff.
 
Last edited:

Wizaard

Well-known member
"I have previously asked you to post a link proving your claim that the EU wants the Spanish police to have the right to “enter the territory to arrest suspected criminals”.

HaHa!! Good Perry Mason impersonation. This is a football forum for expressing opinions mate. Nobody has to prove things.

I'm not sure what part of breach of sovereign rights you're pretending not to understand. The UK had a provisional framework agreement in place with the EU under which the latter would assign agents from its border agency to control the Gibraltar border. The EU has ignored that and is now proposing that Spain assumes total control of all border responsibilities, including checks on people and goods at the land border as well as asylum applications, visa applications, residence permits and police cooperation. And yes, this includes the right for Spanish police to enter the territory in pursuit of suspects.

Anyone who can't grasp the stupidity of granting a predator like Spain complete control of almost every aspect of Gib's access and egress and the effective control of every movement of goods into the territory really doesn't understand the sensitive political situation between the UK and Spain. It's equivalent to giving Argentina control of access to the Falklands.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what you or I think. The fact is that the EU's proposals were never on the table and never part of the 2020 framework agreement and both the UK and Gibraltar are not having it. So Mrs VDL can go back to her European Politics For Dummies book to find some other way of undermining the UK.
And on that basis, you can be called out for a misrepresentation of the facts. Some would say a lie, designed to cause division. For what it's worth, the EU includes Spain, so having their men on the border meets the terms anyway. It's a bit unnecessary to have people travel from Denmark to man a border in Southern Spain.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
Surely the same European Commission that claims to be a a rules-based organisation and insists that the Brexit agreements aren’t up for revisiting is not planning to overturn its own agreement with the UK over Gibraltar. Unbelievable Geoff.
Surely the U.K., which claims to be a rules based country but which nevertheless is trying to overturn the NI Protocol, is not planning to get in a huff over the EU doing the same over Gibraltar? Unbelievable Geoff.
 


Top