On 2017-01-23 17:09:21 +0000, Roland Perry said:

In message
-septe

mber.org, at 16:29:38 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
How would that work? People who have been marked as unwelcome being
met at the gate (in the UK), or is the idea to compel the airlines
not to let them board?

The latter is how it already works.

I suspect the "no-fly" list only has people on it who are regarded as a
terrorist threat, rather than economic migrants.

The UK unwelcome list might include anyone who had been deported for any
reason, or who had a UK criminal conviction, or who had broken UK
immigration rules in the past.

You think the anti-terrorist no-fly list would scale like that?

Yes, of course it would, why not? Hardware is cheap these days. For a
bigger database, all you need is more storage and more/faster CPUs.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 2017-01-23 16:30:21 +0000, Clank said:

Of course, everyone has the right to do things their own way. I'm
intimately familiar with Russian visas, and there they do have a separate
visa for business as opposed to tourism.

India is even more curious (and typically bureaucratic) - officially
you aren't to do business on a tourist visa, nor to do tourism on a
business visa, you'd need both if a trip was dual-purpose. However, I
doubt anybody actually does this - you get a tourist one if only being
a tourist, and a business one if business is involved. What that does
mean, though, is no access to tourist quotas on the train!

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 15:54:18 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

The bridged taxiway serves the North terminal. You're proposing to block
the taxiway serving the South terminal

A taxiway serving part of the South terminal

Yes, about 15 gates in the North terminal. And 15 in the South terminal.

So you're suggesting that 30 gates should be seved by a *single* taxiway

The taxi-way under the bridge, as far as I can tell from Google Earth,
serves nine gates of the North Terminal, seven at the South Terminal and
eight at the South Satellite. Plus five on the Pier 6 north face.

--
Roland Perry

In message , at 17:17:49 on Mon, 23
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:
How would that work? People who have been marked as unwelcome being
met at the gate (in the UK), or is the idea to compel the airlines
not to let them board?
The latter is how it already works.
I suspect the "no-fly" list only has people on it who are regarded
as a
terrorist threat, rather than economic migrants.
The UK unwelcome list might include anyone who had been deported
for any
reason, or who had a UK criminal conviction, or who had broken UK
immigration rules in the past.
You think the anti-terrorist no-fly list would scale like that?

Yes, of course it would, why not? Hardware is cheap these days. For a
bigger database, all you need is more storage and more/faster CPUs.

No, the scarce resource is those deciding who to put on the list, and
handling complaints when people are denied boarding.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:15:49 on Mon, 23
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:

But what if I were to organise a meeting, booking a conference room,
greeting guests and holding a seminar (where I was speaking). Is that
closer to "work" than "business"?

It would depend on that country's rules, but typically it would be
about whether you were there to be paid to do a specific task (e.g.
hold a seminar), or if you were there to have discussions and do
presentations etc about something you are being paid to do while
elsewhere,

It's about half of each.

Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:30:21 on Mon, 23 Jan
2017, Clank remarked:

Of course, everyone has the right to do things their own way. I'm
intimately familiar with Russian visas, and there they do have a separate
visa for business as opposed to tourism. That's mainly a mechanism for
charging more for the benefits of a business visa - not, surprisingly the
right to do business in particular (you don't even have to show you intend
to to get one, you just buy your invitation from a different place), but
rather the more expensive business visa gives you multiple entries over a
year, rather than the tourist visa which is issued for the exact number of
days of your planned trip.

Just to show Usenet is living up to its reputation of provoking
counter-examples, I've got a Russian visa for what they classified as a
business trip, valid for one entry/exit during a 30 day window.

Similarly I have one-visit dated business visas for Egypt.
--
Roland Perry

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 15:54:19 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
If you aren't a tourist, you need a visa.

No, business visitors don't. I've visited the USA more than 60 times on
business after the visa waiver scheme came in, without a visa.

I'm optimistic that we won't need visas for casual travel within
Europe. As we were never part of Schengen, I'm hopeful that things
won't change much.

Almost all my extensive European travel has been on business.

Sure, and so you shouldn't need a visa in the post-Brexit world.

See my earlier comments about business vs "working".
--
Roland Perry

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 15:54:19 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

In what sense would doing nothing "return control of our borders", which
a slim majority voted for?

They weren't objecting to tourists and casual visitors. They wanted to
limit the number of foreign workers potentially taking jobs from British
workers, and foreign users of the NHS and other welfare services.

What about foreign workers in the NHS? I accompanied someone today for a
minor operation, and of the dozen or more staff we came into contact
with (from receptionist to surgeon) only three appeared (from their
accents) to be born and bred in the UK.

FAOD we have no issues with the standard of care received today.
--
Roland Perry

On 23/01/2017 17:19, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-01-23 16:30:21 +0000, Clank said:

Of course, everyone has the right to do things their own way. I'm
intimately familiar with Russian visas, and there they do have a
separate
visa for business as opposed to tourism.

India is even more curious (and typically bureaucratic) - officially you
aren't to do business on a tourist visa, nor to do tourism on a business
visa, you'd need both if a trip was dual-purpose. However, I doubt
anybody actually does this - you get a tourist one if only being a
tourist, and a business one if business is involved. What that does
mean, though, is no access to tourist quotas on the train!

Neil

Isn't there some odd rule that you can't have more than one current
visa? So if you have a year multi-entry business visa you can't go on
holiday?

On 2017-01-23 18:05:57 +0000, Someone Somewhere said:

Isn't there some odd rule that you can't have more than one current
visa? So if you have a year multi-entry business visa you can't go on
holiday?

Quite possibly, and thus even more bizarre (and widely disregarded).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.