On 2017-01-22 19:54:36 +0000, Recliner said:

The US ESTA is part of a Visa waiver scheme.

It's a pseudo-visa waiver more like an e-visa system. It's been
proposed that Schengen would introduce something similar. But really
API offers most of the same benefits with less faff.

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

Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-01-22 19:54:36 +0000, Recliner said:

The US ESTA is part of a Visa waiver scheme.

It's a pseudo-visa waiver more like an e-visa system. It's been
proposed that Schengen would introduce something similar. But really
API offers most of the same benefits with less faff.

Yes, I hope API is regarded as adequate for flights within Europe,
post-Brexit.

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 16:17:58 on Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 15:44:33 on Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
The current pier 6 works well in Gatwick, and it would be unacceptable
if linked to the end of an already overlong pier by an even longer,
higher bridge than it has now.

Because you wouldn't need a bridge - access to the gates in question
would be via the taxi-way that didn't need to be bridged.

How? It would still be a remote satellite pier, whichever terminal it's
linked to.

You could link it at concourse level. That wouldn't impede any planes as
they'd go along the taxi-way that currently has the bridge over it. he
taxi-way that would end up being blocked is the one which is clearly
unsuitable for some reason, because it could otherwise be used by all
the planes currently going under the bridge.

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

--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:34:20 on Sun, 22
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:
Within 10 years I think the UK will consist of England and Wales.
And only Wales because on its own it'd be like Albania; it depends
too much on England's economy.

Albania once depended on England's economy?

You know what I meant.

And you knew what I meant - it was a joke.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:36:06 on Sun, 22
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:

Without some bureaucracy, how do you tell the purpose of the visit?

Like Switzerland, which is in Schengen but does not allow freedom of
work without a work permit (though these are available in large numbers
to EU people), you control the work, not the entry.

My question was about the USA who *do* control the entry (as well as the
work).
--
Roland Perry

In message
-septem
ber.org, at 17:03:45 on Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
I think there's a *lot* more travel between the UK and the rest of Europe.
And as there will be a soft intra-Ireland border, and an open Ulster-GB
border, there would be little point in inventing a new bureaucratic
obstacle to travel to/from Europe. The airports simply wouldn't have the
space for the gigantic Immigration areas that would be needed, nor would
there be the staff available.

Depends how it works. Something like ESTA which would be
pre-registered and recognised electronically on entry wouldn't require
substantial extra space if any.

Not so much in the airport, because it's a way of registering to use the
gates, and there would still need to be lots of new manual desks for all
those who hadn't pre-registered.

But it would require a big bureaucracy to process all the applications.
And, of course, the EU would need an equivalent bureaucracy to process UK
applications. It all seems rather pointless if nearly all applications
from EU citizens are likely to be automatically accepted by default.

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

In message 1239380984.506806557.945802.recliner.ng-
, at 19:54:36 on Sun, 22 Jan
2017, Recliner remarked:

The US ESTA is part of a

Tourist-
Visa waiver scheme.

If you aren't a tourist, you need 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.
--
Roland Perry

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 02:26:56 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

The US ESTA is part of a Visa waiver scheme.

It's a pseudo-visa waiver more like an e-visa system. It's been
proposed that Schengen would introduce something similar. But really
API offers most of the same benefits with less faff.

Yes, I hope API is regarded as adequate for flights within Europe,
post-Brexit.

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?
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:17:36 on Sun, 22 Jan
2017, " remarked:

The longer delay in Gatwick North is at Immigration at busy times

I was enroled in the Iris scheme, so no delays (apart from having to
fail to get the Iris machine to recognise me, which then put you at the
head of the manual queue).

Same in my case.

They eventually got wise to it, however. Thus, whenever IRIS failed to
recognise somebody, they would simply say the equivalent of:

"That's your fault. Get to the back of the queue, you dog!"

It's their fault the machine doesn't recognise me (I was enroled, not
pretending to be enroled).
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:59:27 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septem
ber.org, at 17:03:45 on Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
I think there's a *lot* more travel between the UK and the rest of Europe.
And as there will be a soft intra-Ireland border, and an open Ulster-GB
border, there would be little point in inventing a new bureaucratic
obstacle to travel to/from Europe. The airports simply wouldn't have the
space for the gigantic Immigration areas that would be needed, nor would
there be the staff available.

Depends how it works. Something like ESTA which would be
pre-registered and recognised electronically on entry wouldn't require
substantial extra space if any.

Not so much in the airport, because it's a way of registering to use the
gates, and there would still need to be lots of new manual desks for all
those who hadn't pre-registered.

But it would require a big bureaucracy to process all the applications.
And, of course, the EU would need an equivalent bureaucracy to process UK
applications. It all seems rather pointless if nearly all applications
from EU citizens are likely to be automatically accepted by default.

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

The answer is fairly simple - pass a law that firms must hire uk citizens
in preference to foreign nations unless they can give a good reason why they
can't find a suitable candidate amongst the 60 million people on the island.

--
Spud