The Brexit Thread

Dave

TS Founding Member
To be honest, I think Patel must have nicked my idea because I proposed similar on the tinternet about a year ago somewhere or other. The idea is that if you turn up here and then are swiftly whisked off to another country that you have no interest in living in, over time it will deter others from turning up here illegally as they will be back to square one. It's about making it pointless to enter our country illegally. Go about entering our country legally from whichever country you want to, or end up having to do the same from another country that you don't want to be in. The idea that anyone can just rock up here illegally and then stay here from day one needs to be shown to be not possible in any way shape or form.

I have other wonderful ideas too that I'm sure Priti would be interested in. Alas, I doubt the discussed scheme will ever come into fruition for various reasons.

It won’t stop people crossing, they will just use more criminals to then avoid being caught once in the UK.

Anything that can be done to stop rubber dinghy’s crossing the worlds busiest shipping lane has to be a good thing.
My plan to stop this would be create a place in France where people could go and apply for asylum, trouble is most of those crossing (fit young men) would not be successful so would still try and cross in rubber dinghy’s.
Maybe sending them to the middle of Africa is not such a stupid idea after all.

France offered the UK this very facility, it would also work as if you collect biometric data for all applicants and someone is unsuccessful then if they illegally enter the UK you know they have come from France as there is an official record and can re-deport them to France, the current issue is once someone is on UK soil they refuse to disclose their country of origin or the route they took so legally you can’t move them as someone can’t be stateless.

The UK government refused the French offer. Because you know any cooperation with mainland Europe makes Jacob Reece-Mogg threaten to spank Johnson….

As for why people want to come to the UK, firstly the language, secondly most have some family already here.
 

Alsty

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Shambhala
The United Kingdom left the EU Single Market at the end of the transition period at 11pm on the 31st December 2020. The EU has been applying full customs checks on items entering the Single Market from the UK since then.

However the UK is still not carrying out any checks of food, plants and animals entering the UK from the EU. The government was planning to apply them from July but has delayed applying custom checks again. This is the fourth time they have kicked this can down the road. So much for taking control of our borders. (Incidentally, customs checks of other items have only been applied since January of this year, 12 months after the EU applied theirs).

The government said "it would be wrong to impose new administrative burdens and risk disruption at ports" at a time of higher costs due to the war in Ukraine and rising energy prices. Brexit opportunities minister Jacob Rees-Mogg said the government was reviewing how it would implement checks on EU goods and "the new controls regime will come into force at the end of 2023", and claimed the delay "would save saving British businesses up to £1bn in annual costs".

Is this an admission that applying full customs checks to food, plants and animals entering the UK from the EU would cost the country £1bn each year? Money that we didn't have to spend when we were in the customs union? I'm curious to know how much the cost is for all types of goods.

Also this is great news for EU businesses. It means they can export things to us easily (no checks), but we cannot export things to them easily (full checks).
 
Last edited:

Alsty

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Shambhala
I actually feel like JRM has dropped his foot in it there. He's basically said that implementing the checks required because of Brexit has a substantial economic cost. I don't recall seeing that on the side of a red bus.
 

Matt N

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Mako (SeaWorld Orlando)
Sorry if this seems slightly random, but I have a question following my recent trip to Germany.

Why is it that immigration measures don’t seem to be reciprocal between the UK and the EU?

The reason I ask this is because when exiting Germany for our flight home, we had to pass through a second set of immigration checks, as we were on an international gate (presumably due to being outside of the EU). My dad said to me that he assumed that meant that we’d get a much quicker journey through immigration back in Stansted, as all of the EU residents would need extra checks, but as it turned out, EU residents were also allowed in through fastrack immigration at Stansted, meaning that the queue was very long.

Why is this? Wouldn’t any Brexit deal have ensured that both countries had reciprocal measures for immigration?

The new e-passport gates were also a source of frustration (I couldn’t get mine to work no matter how hard I tried), but that’s not expressly related to Brexit, so probably not a good topic for this thread…
 

JAperson

TS Member
This is because Germany and many other counties in the EU are part of the Schengen agreement (we were never part of it instead part of the common travel area with the Republic of Ireland - to which we are still a member), it allows people to travel between say France and Germany without ever having to pass through passport checks, this means that when visitors enter they are stamped in and when they leave they are stamped out. As we are out of the EU we are only allowed a certain amount of time in the Schengen zone without applying for a visa, meaning they need to know exactly when we enter and leave. In terms of travel agreements (I.e visa's) we are pretty much reciprocal, it was one of the only things they managed to agree with the Brexit negotiations.
 

Alsty

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Shambhala
Ah, looks like we're back to the sabre rattling...


Breaking an internationally binding agreement that we signed up for and then choosing to disregard the parts that are a bit inconvenient.

This is all off the back of the DUP refusing to take their seats in Stormont, despite the fact most people voted for parties that actually want the NI Protocol to remain.

_124754345_protocol-nc.png

The NI Protocol is actually working for businesses in Northern Ireland because they have full access to the Single Market, unlike the rest of the UK. However it's politically sensitive for the UK Government because it shows this Single Market access means their economic recovery outstrips the other UK nations... 🤔
 
Last edited:

JAperson

TS Member
Yes but they are claiming it's not a visa, but rather similar to an American ESTA, which they call a visa exemption. I do think this is a bad move by the EU although I have heard our government is looking at something similar, especially because it's meant to be reciprocal. Then again we can hardly say our government is sticking to the agreement so I suppose this is justified. I know this technically doesn't break the agreement but I do think it's the wrong thing to do.
 

Dave

TS Founding Member
Yes but they are claiming it's not a visa, but rather similar to an American ESTA, which they call a visa exemption. I do think this is a bad move by the EU although I have heard our government is looking at something similar, especially because it's meant to be reciprocal. Then again we can hardly say our government is sticking to the agreement so I suppose this is justified. I know this technically doesn't break the agreement but I do think it's the wrong thing to do.

It’s not a move by the EU, this change to requiring the ETA came into law before brexit was voted on, it just is coming into force now. As we are a third country under EU rules (our choice) it automatically applies.

I believe the EU had explored exemptions but the UK didn’t want them as they didn’t want to offer the EU reciprocal exemptions.
 

JAperson

TS Member
It’s not a move by the EU, this change to requiring the ETA came into law before brexit was voted on, it just is coming into force now. As we are a third country under EU rules (our choice) it automatically applies.

I believe the EU had explored exemptions but the UK didn’t want them as they didn’t want to offer the EU reciprocal exemptions.
I respect that and I was aware of that, but I feel that it doesn't help them at all. It makes literally no difference apart from it makes it harder. Isn't this going to cause problems for countries like Spain that relay on UK tourism? It seems rather pointless to me.
 

Dave

TS Founding Member
I respect that and I was aware of that, but I feel that it doesn't help them at all. It makes literally no difference apart from it makes it harder. Isn't this going to cause problems for countries like Spain that relay on UK tourism? It seems rather pointless to me.

You have to apply international law consistently, without an agreement specifically signed with the UK if they didn’t apply the rules to the UK other countries could take them to court as it would be legally unfair.
 

Plastic Person

TS Member
I respect that and I was aware of that, but I feel that it doesn't help them at all. It makes literally no difference apart from it makes it harder. Isn't this going to cause problems for countries like Spain that relay on UK tourism? It seems rather pointless to me.

Spain did not vote to leave the EU, the UK voted to leave the EU. I’m sure those in charge have crunched the numbers and worked out that UK citizens who have the disposable income to visit Europe over the next few years can cough up an additional fiver for admin. Although the way things are looking, most folks will barely be able to afford a Costa Coffee, never mind the Costa Del Sol.
 

JAperson

TS Member
The UK is not a special case. Why should we get treated differently from any other non-member?
Because we have a different agreement with them to other countries. We follow a similar system and we provide considerable tourism profits to some major EU members, some of who's economy rely on this.
You have to apply international law consistently, without an agreement specifically signed with the UK if they didn’t apply the rules to the UK other countries could take them to court as it would be legally unfair.
Well that's obviously untrue, plenty of countries pick and choose what visa requirements there are for specific countries without agreements. The difference is the UK and EU agreed to reciprocal visa free travel for 90 days. This is effectively a loop-hole.
Spain did not vote to leave the EU, the UK voted to leave the EU. I’m sure those in charge have crunched the numbers and worked out that UK citizens who have the disposable income to visit Europe over the next few years can cough up an additional fiver for admin. Although the way things are looking, most folks will barely be able to afford a Costa Coffee, never mind the Costa Del Sol.
It's not about the price though is it? It's about them not respecting the tourism industry that they need. It's basically saying we don't want you here, I for one don't think it's very inviting, will it stop me visiting? No of course not, but I just don't think it's the right way to go about things. Although I do get that having a conversation with the current UK government is an absolute mess.

I really do wish the stupid referendum didn't happen or that Nigel Farage and his lot hadn't managed to trick an entire county into voting for something that was bound to cause all sorts of problems. The EU is one of those institutions, if your not in it, it will bully you so it gets it way in terms of trade and movement. Realistically, the EU is incredibly problematic but you can't fix it from the outside, we were stupid to leave the world biggest trade area that was bound to bully us once we left.

Hopefully once this current government has gone we can negotioage a good deal with the EU, one were we are on the same standards (we were already there so I don't get our current governments desire to lower our standards to work with other countries, after all the UK is very close to many EU countries), a deal that included visa free access possibly for a longer period of time and hopefully other provisions including potentially forming some new trade zone with the EU (which is a proven concept I.e Switzerland, Norway and Iceland), we'd have to divulge slightly more for practicality reasons and to try and attempt to console those who voted for brexit but still don't regret there decision. I think under a competent leader who's willing to negotiate, and that means making concessions on both sides, and once the EU is under new leadership too (which by that time it will be) there can hopefully be a new relationship.
 

Benzin

TS Member
The "they need us more than we need them" argument fell apart so quickly afterwards.

End of the day it was the UK who took the choice to leave. And whilst it could've easily been on good terms the daft nationalism (and cronyism) kicked in and created a deal that those who agreed it are already trying to renege on.

We cannot act all high and mighty after the way the country has (and still is) behaving. The EU always had the better hand in the situation because of being a bloc, and really they didn't do anything as we were seemingly intent on shooting both feet off then crying foul because we had to go to the hospital.

Presumably the EU ESTA will last a few years like the US one anyway?
 

JAperson

TS Member
The "they need us more than we need them" argument fell apart so quickly afterwards.
This is true for the majority of cases but not all. Tourism is the exeption however they knew we would still come, and we still will I just don't think it sends out a very nice signal.
End of the day it was the UK who took the choice to leave. And whilst it could've easily been on good terms the daft nationalism (and cronyism) kicked in and created a deal that those who agreed it are already trying to renege on.
That's why our current governmnet can't negotiate with credibility to sort stupid things like this out.
We cannot act all high and mighty after the way the country has (and still is) behaving. The EU always had the better hand in the situation because of being a bloc, and really they didn't do anything as we were seemingly intent on shooting both feet off then crying foul because we had to go to the hospital.
As I stated in my post, this is the doing of Nigel Farage and Boris, lying to the public to get them to vote on loads of false promises. If anything we have to act mighty to at least try and compete, it's the only option we have.
 

Alsty

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Shambhala
The ETIAS is scheduled to be required from May 2023. It will cost €7 and is valid for three years.

It applies to all non-EU citizens visiting the Schengen area who do not need a visa.
 

Craig

TS Administrator
ETIAS was proposed way back in 2016, and the UK was said to be a big supporter of the idea too. As a result the claims that this is somehow "punishment" for Brexit is just another false argument to try and push this whole "pettiness" narrative.

So much was made by Brexiteers of "controlling our borders" throughout the campaign. So I find complaining about ETIAS, a way for the EU to better control the Schengen area - their own border, as a bit of a hypocritical argument.

I wouldn't consider ETIAS to be pointless either. The aim is to ensure that third country citizens are pre-screened centrally in a uniform way, no matter where in the Schengen area they enter. It ensures the same checks are performed on everyone, so the possibility of someone slipping through the net after something was missed it reduced. Hopefully, it'll reduce delays at the border as a result too.

As for the UK having an exception, we lost access to most of the EU's security databases after leaving. It's legally impossible for us to have access to some such as Schengen Information System II, as it's a requirement to be a Schengen member to do so. As the Schengen area was established a couple of years after the European Union, we enjoyed an exception to that requirement, but there's zero chance of that moving forward now since we chose leave.

Honestly, I really don't see this as having a major impact on tourism as some have suggested. The €7 fee, just under £2 a year is hardly going to break the bank, so I don't see it causing people not to bother travelling abroad to the likes of Spain. The economic impact is likely minuscule in the grand scheme of things, and we like our sun too much! Ultimately, the potential economic impact of a failure in border security is far higher than a few quid for a visa waiver.
 
Top