GreekIslandGirl wrote:supporttheunderdog wrote: ... The facility for Greece to get assistance from the EU through Frontex to rectify them has existed for some time.
In theory. Now the
deficiencies in Frontex "assistance" have been
identified, albeit in this roundabout fashion, then they are being held up to be resolved ..... maybe.
(PS - so deficient have Frontex been .... that NATO has arrived
to help Frontex .... if you had a brain, it should all become clear.)
This is as usual a bland assertion which is unsupported by argument let alone evidence, such as reference to The legislation or FRONTEX own website,
Jiggy Giggy is as usual selectively quoting, as to get help, as i have explained clearly elsewhere, GREECE has to ask for help, as FRONTEX had no mandate to intervene unless and untill GREECE requested assistance. This is against the background that FRONTEX's principal roles are to set common standards and ensure training is given so there is a common approach among member states, to evaluate and report member states compliance with the Member states obligstions to properly monitor and control the external borders in accordance with the requirements of the SBC and to Coordinate joint operations. This is where FRONTEX has no equipment nor staff for the performance of border control operations and where when FRONTEX is requested to assist, the personel and equipment are provided from other Member States border forces and where there will always be a member of the border force of the member state with any such team of personell from other member states.
This is all made clear in the FRONTEX website, which plainly you have either not read or, if you have, ignored. It is also as set out in the various EU law including 2007/2004' 562/2006' 1051 to 1053/2013', etc, all as time time to time amneneded or in the case of the main SBC, codified.
Why did it take until 3rd December for GREECE to ask for help?
Therefore if gIGGle girl, and i did so laugh at how ludicrous and divorced from reality her contention is, is going to gain any credibility she is in my view going to have to properly justify her position by reference to the law. She cannot, at least not in regard to the law as it stood from November 2015 till April 2016' which is the material time wheun insoections were performed and decisions taken, which laws were then valid and still are, albeitbin tbe case of the SBC codified, which decisions are not redundant, as they are still being acted upon.
Rather We will no doubt get a comment about some alleged reality which some how trancends the actual position, though it does not, but where what is being done is being done by virtue and in accordance with laws and decisions.