On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:34:23 +0000, Nightjar cpb wrote:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2.../fresh-battle-
awaits-cameron-as-eu-plans-to-scrap-dublin-regulation

The UK can opt out of any rules on migration that it does not like.
It opted in to Dublin, because that was beneficial to the UK. It
does not have to adopt any alternative agreement.

Don't bank on anything if we remain in.

If we leave, then we would have to accept any rules the EU wishes to
impose for us to be permitted to trade with them. If we stay in, we
continue to keep the exemptions and opt out options we currently
have.

Have to admit, I'm struggling to see how suspending Dublin would be
any kind of "first step in letting rapists come to UK"...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

Perhaps somebody would be so kind as to explain?

You're not clever are you?
It means that "refugee" that entered say Italy, could legally come here
and register here rather than in Italy.

So, you are saying that all refugees are rapists?

Even ignoring that, it doesn't mean that at all.

It means that a piece of pan-European co-operation and information
sharing is being suspended. No more, no less.

Of course, the kippers would have had us out of that anyway, so it would
never have been available to the UK to start with, so anybody that came
here and applied for asylum in the UK will be in exactly the same
situation post-Dublin as they would be if the UK had never joined the EEC/
EU in the first place, since the UK's asylum obligations are actually
part of our having signed various UN treaties.

So... a question for those promulgating the "refugees are rapists" logic
here. Should the UK leave the UN, too?