No biometrics inbound at Roscoff yesterday evening (10/04) and no obvious evidence of any equipment to do it either.
FOR ALL EES STUFF, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, MOANS, JOYS AND ANYTHING ELSE
- Thread starter Wapping
- Start date
Francley40
Registered user
Many thanks, Gents.
Sounds like it's a bit hit-and-miss.....
Sounds like it's a bit hit-and-miss.....
France ( Montpellier) last week , immigration took about 15 mins for a full flight. Right hand fingerprints ,look at camera whilst man physically stamps passport. All the electronic scanners were there, lined up like daleks but all switched off. A frequent trveller behind us said they had tried using them but given up.
You're right, of course, but that's not what I meant.
The French will "forget" to do exit scans on the migrants who have previously entered from Schengen (having gained entry into Schengen either by using their passports at a recognised border, or crossing covertly into Schengen on a small boat, hidden in a lorry etc). If they do an exit check of any sort, there will be evidence that Mohammed was once in France and then crossed to the UK from there. If we then decide to deport Mo for any reason, the UK will then have a route for deportation.
By forgetting to do any exit scans, France will conveniently be able to deny that he was ever in France and therefore is nothing to do with them.
(For years and years, in the days when the main route for illicit entry into the UK was hidden in a lorry from Calais, Border Force would routinely photograph and fingerprint any clandestine immigrants found in the back of lorries in France before handing them over to the French authorities. The French authorities did nothing with these migrants, expecting them to try again tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow until they got through.
However, with the UK taking the fingerprints, it meant we had proof that each migrant had been in France. If/when subsequently picked up in the UK, we had evidence that they had come from France illegally and therefore could be returned to France. So the French - in shameless effort to maintain their "looking the other way" approach to illegals getting into the UK - decided that taking fingerprints and photographs of the migrants was a flagrant breach the poor migrants' Human Rights as they were not criminals (in the eyes of the French). We could only take fingerprints or photos on French soil with the migrants express permission, in writing, which of course was never given. The French also took action via European Court to ensure that all previous data, gathered through this illegal and inhumane treatment by the nasty British state, was destroyed.
Once this action had been taken, there was no evidence that these migrants had ever been in France, apparently. Even clandestines dragged off lorries in Dover - on ferries that only came from France - were invisible to the French. We knew they'd come from France, the French knew they'd come through France, but without evidence the French said they could have come from anywhere and why should they believe us? Gallic shrugs all round... tens of thousands of migrants are probably still in the UK through the deliberate connivance of the French.
Also worth remembering that for years and years, wherever in France an illegal immigrant was picked up, they were sent to an immigration centre in Sangatte, a stone's throw from Calais. When Sangatte was eventually closed, migrants were sent to "the jungle", a rough camping site just outside Calais. No room for them anywhere else in France, apparently.
Carriers taking anyone out of the UK are required to take and store passport details of ALL passengers. They face heavy fines of they don't. So while the check might not be quite as thorough as a check done by eGates or a BF officer - we probably can't really expect the EasyJet service staff to be quite as hot on dodgy passport photos - there is a check.
I'm sorry you this is bollocks from the 'hard of thinking.' How much experience do you have of dealing with illegal immigrants at the border?
Please see my explanation in reply to jefformston.
You can be a patronising twat sometimes.
If the French do ‘forget’ then that presumably is at a Port where the ‘illegal’ will need to them board a legal crossing method. When exiting said legal crossing method they will need to go through UK Border Control who will ‘stamp’ / scan them into the UK. If they don’t have a passport then it would be straight back on the boat to France with a hefty fine to the ferry/tunnel operator. If they then later needed to be ‘returned’ then that would be to the their country of origin, not France.
Why would the French ‘forget’ to stamp/scan the passports? Legal entry isn’t a problem or if it is it’s of the UK’s own making nothing to do with the French, it’s illegal entry that is the problem and it’s not just a UK problem, it’s all across Europe. It is something the whole of Europe need to work on together, at the moment the ‘solution’ seems to be let’s just get it off our doorstep and let someone else deal with it.
your long reply still does not make sense
you mention illegal entrants to Schengen. Why would the French do exit scans on this group, who presumably use a dinghy from a beach not a legit crossing to leave France?
you are rambling incoherently conflating legal and illegal entrants and exit scans whilst having a xenophobic pop at the French.
I suggest your occupation has somewhat distorted your view on the topic.
Your first paragraph: the migrant may well have a passport which will be used to exit France, satisfy carriers etc. (If they've travelled via dinghy then it's obviously not an issue as they won't have any passport at all. The passport they used to gain entry to Schengen - if indeed they had one - will be long gone). When arriving in the UK, we may not be satisfied (for whatever reason) but by then it's our problem, not the problem of the French. France will not accept back anyone who should be returned to them. It's less of an issues at Calais, where UK passport controls take place on French soil, but for other ferry ports it is an issue. French will simply ask for proof that the person has come from France. They won't take our word for it that they arrived on a ferry from Cherbourg (or wherever).
Second paragraph: If they have exit scans, that would constitute proof - even the French would struggle to deny that the fingerprints they had taken in France a few hours earlier did not constitute proof. Illegal entry is very much our problem. The French don't care. All they want is the ability to deny that the person has come from France. We're stuck eith the illegal immigrant/asylum seeker.
I agree that a Europe-wide solution is required. One obstacle to that is the political ideology of free passage among Schengen countries. All countries have placed their own border security into the hands of all the other Schengen member states, most of whom take the doorstep approach you mention.
Dinghies are one route.
Simply catching a ferry is another, then claiming asylum when they get onto British soil. That is where the issue of proof that they were once in France becomes relevant. France should do exit scans on everyone leaving Schengen from France, but they won't. They'll do it for you and me coming back from our holidays, but for anyone who they think might be dodgy - certainly anyone without a French entry stamp in their passport - their systems will mysteriously fail. The French have a choice when dealing with someone suspect: either investigate fully, while detaining the individual at their expense for what could be a considerable period of time while they ascertain how and when they first got into France; or wave them on their way to the UK while making sure there is no categoric proof that they were ever in France at all.
I have no xenophobia of any individuals. But French state officials/politicians are a group deserving of a phobia all their own. The mental gymnastics they will perform to avoid taking responsibility for their choices over border control are staggering.
A bit of a conspiracy theorist are you? Do you have any proof of the accusations you are making?
Was it not the case that the migrants were held at the independent - quasi or non governmental- holding camp, administered by the Red Cross or summat?
I thought the Red Cross centre was closed (partly due to demands from the UK government) whereupon the migrants formed their own shantytown, known as ‘The Jungle’, it replacing several smaller and equally illegal camps. This illegal camp was then cleared by the French authorities, with the ‘jungelers’ carted off elsewhere in France. I vaguely remember shipping containers came into it somewhere.
Or do I misremember, which is quite possible.
Anyway, no matter what, the camps are still there, spread between close to the Dutch border to well past Boulogne and dotted around mies inland. Just like pikey camps in England, they won’t go away on their own,. But hey, the goggled eyed gurning messiah will solve it…..
Last edited:
On a brighter note, the great news is…. Once you are past the EES system (in either 40 seconds or two hours, opinions and experiences vary) the whole of EU Europe opens up under your wheels….. for up to 90 days…. With no more checks, delays or inconvenience….. not even funny foreign money. Right until the moment you come back to our green and pleasant, when you are obliged to tap on the drawbridge in the hope that the stout guardians of the fortress will lower it. You then doff your cap and praise them for their diligence. Without their watchful eye, we’d all be murdered in our beds, or worse be forced to abstain from bacon.
Last edited:
Yes, there is, but I would say it’s variable.
I'd rather call myself a realist!
I'm confident that my opinions are grounded in fact. Alas, any evidence I might have is not something I could share.
Last edited:
I agree. For the UK government to hand over control of this aspect of the border to private sector was and still is a mistake, in my opinion. Exit checks have never been a very big part of the governments plans and I think there is not much doubt that entry checks are way more important. They're not mutually exclusive; just difficult to do both within the resources successive governments have made available.
Sporadic exit checks seem to produce lots of casework. Whether the crime detected merits an increase in resources becomes a political decision. I suspect a part of the decision making process is the practicality of exit checks within existing port infrastructures and the potential delays to passengers and freight.
Chinese is the way to go. I read it here.
Worry then about the other half.
