Annetts key
Established Member
More to the point, when are we having Toriexit?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Brexit matters
- Thread starter Xenophon PCDGS
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,770
Yes. Before Covid I was shown around potential apartments for a 5 - 10 year lease. Idea was to downsize here - three bed semi's too much for me, buy a retirement flat here and "holiday" home in Gib which I could rent out through an agency when I didn't need it.
Originally my thoughts were to do that on Ibiza or Menorca, but Brexit red tape, visas, income levels and cost of health insurance put paid to that, don't want the hassle. Thought Gibraltar, being basically British, was the answer - all the sunshine but without the hassle!!
Of course many who VOTED FOR Brexit and were thinking of spending their retirement overseas have the exact same problems, and if on UK pensions might not be allowed residential visas if their income is insufficient. Think it's around £25k minimum to be allowed to retire to Spain??
That's the thing, this whole two-way pseudo-visa arrangement (UK to EU and EU to UK) sounds worse than the arrangement we had before 1973. An inhabitant of Dover did not, presumably, have to get a visa waiver to travel 20 miles via boat to Calais in 1972. And the same for an inhabitant of Calais making the 20 mile trip to Dover. Presumably they just showed their passport at the border post and that was it.
So our rights to holiday in the EU, and the rights of EU citizens to holiday here, are, presumably, not only more restricted than they were in 1992 and 1982, but also, apparently, 1972 and 1962 too!
So we're winding the clock back not just 50 years, but perhaps significantly longer than that - and perhaps have the most restricted travel rights of any time after the immediate post-war years.
Yes but you have to remember that now we can have champagne bottles without foil on the top and that really is quite significant compared to these trifling visa issues!
I don't get the reasoning of Brexiters with holiday homes on the continent, who (at least before Brexit) spent much of their time there.
One ex-colleague of mine has a holiday home in France, which I think he intended to spend much of his retirement living in. He is, or certainly was in 2016, a very militant Brexiter, certainly the anti-freedom-of-movement type. Oh the irony! Talk about turkeys and Christmas; vote in a referendum in a way which will lead to you having extremely restricted access to your own holiday home.
Peter "Brexiter with home in France" Lilley is a famous example of this kind of hypocrite. If I were the French government, given his support for a movement which has denied French citizens the right to live in the UK, I'd force him to sell that home and send him packing from France permanently!
Last edited:
I don't even get this news?
The French will surely use foil, and only they can make 'proper' Champagne. We can make sparkling wines, but if we want to export it then the foil will come down to what the customer wants (whether that's a distributor, retailer or even the end user who expects a bottle that matches a drink often used for a big occasion).
It sounds just as stupid as crown symbols on a pint glass (which were never banned, we just got cheaper glasses from abroad because 99% of people didn't care or even notice) or moving signs in tunnels so they're spaced such that the numbers look better in imperial than when converted from metric.
The difference, of course, is that we only had a lease on Hong Kong and that lease was coming to an end.
What's best for most people is, of course, FoM between UK and Gibraltar and FoM between Gibraltar and Spain. This of course means there would have to be FoM between the UK and Spain (and the rest of Schengen) but we're not allowed to support that, otherwise we are obviously dinosaurs stuck in the 1990s.
It's the Brexiters who are selfish for enacting severe restrictions on FoM between the UK and EU/Schengen, and apparently Gibraltar too.
Part of Brexiters' arguments is British nationalism. Surely if they are true to their British nationalist principles, any hard border between the UK and Gibraltar should be completely in contravention of that?
Last edited:
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,770
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure my parents in the 60's/70's were allowed a one-day (at least) post office "passport" for France, without even a photo on? If I'm correct, it still might be amongst my collection of their documents - they often caravanned on the south coast so it's plausible that they had day trips to Calais/Dieppe etc. can anyone confirm/deny those documents existed?
Wonder at what stage those fighting for Brexit will realise the more difficult/impossible it becomes for ordinary UK folks to work/travel/retire/study/export to/import from Europe then the more will turn against Brexit and we get a swift return - possibly via the Single Market? So it's in Brexit's interests to keep everyone happy, put the barriers there and Brits will be voting to have them removed.
The Tories were all in favour of the EU, then they turned against to keep themselves in power, perhaps they will return to the EU if they see the polls heavily in the favour of return?? They've done a few u-turns lately I recall!!
It's gonna be a very interetsing couple of years noting holidaymakers' experiences with ETIAS/profiling etc and how the polls shift in favour of return/Single Market etc.
That's the thing. It will presumably make EU borders as "hard" as the US border. As I said, and as you seem to imply, we have never in modern times (likely as far back to the 1950s) had to deal with such hard borders between here and our immediate continental neighbours. I suspect stringent, US-style treatment at EU borders will mean more people will wake up to the reality of hard Brexit. People are not used to that sort of thing for a quick hop across to the continent.
Another issue concerns the 90 day thing. Presumably before 1973, each country on the continent would have had their own time limit, rather than a single time limit for 25-odd countries. So maybe France had a 90-day limit, Germany the same, the Netherlands the same and so on. But, once you'd spent 90 days in one country, you could move on. So before 1973, as long as you spent no more than 90 days in any one country, you could presumably wander around continental Europe for months and no-one would bat an eyelid. Even if the limit was just 30 days per country in the 60s, we'd still have had more rights to roam round the continent compared to now.
Last edited:
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Back in the 1920s the biggest control over the movement of people was that regular long-distance travel was too expensive for almost anyone not super-rich, and there wasn't really such a thing as commercial passenger flights. So the issue of needing some way to deal with sudden population changes caused by mass immigration didn't really exist. Not really comparable with today.
Partially. Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon Peninsula had been ceded in perpetuity. The 'New Territories' was the bit that was leased for 99 years in 1898. But when it came to negotiate over what would happen at the end of the lease it was deemed best to treat the entirety of Hong Kong as one. As it wasn't possible to extend the lease then the whole colony was put under Chinese rule.
Enthusiast
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,226
I cannot recall ID Cards but I do remember the "British Visitors' Passport".
It was a cardboard document, about the size of a conventional passport when folded in three. It could be obtained at a main Post Office upon presentation of a birth certificate or full driving licence. IIRC there were a few other accepted forms of ID such as a pension book. The applicant had also to provide a passport sized photograph which was stuck onto the document and endorsed with a special rubber stamp (not the usual PO stamp). It was available from 1961 to 1996 and was valid for 12 months for tourist purposes only in most European countries and (I think) one or two other popular tourist destinations outside Europe such as Morocco and Tunisia. In 1966 it cost 7s/6d (37½p) when a full passport cost £1.10s.0d (£1.50).
They were discontinued because of widespread fraudulent applications. I recall on one occasion dashing up to Dover Post Office with a friend who had forgotten his passport. Fortunately he had his driving licence with him. He quickly filled in the form, got a photo from the photo booth in the PO and I countersigned his application as an upstanding member of the community. Back to the port just in time to catch the ferry to Calais. Happy Days!
The British Visitors Passport - The Simplicity Of A Travel Document
The British Visitor's Passport was actually a simple and inexpensive travel document until 1996 which you could get at the post office.
www.passport-collector.com
Millions migrated from Europe to the US, particularly around the turn of the 19th Century. I'm not sure today compares with that movement to be honest!
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Given what those people then did to the previous residents of the lands that now comprise the US, I'm not sure that you'd want to cite that as any kind of example of migration being a good thing
Sure! Manifest Destiny and all that, just not your destiny if your already there!Given what those people then did to the previous residents of the lands that now comprise the US, I'm not sure that you'd want to cite that as any kind of example of migration being a good thing
However it was still the mass migration of a lot of people and it was still an example of a significant change in population in a comparatively short period.
‘I was lied to by Boris Johnson’: Why much of UK fishing is still waiting for a Brexit boost
On one hand you have to feel sorry for the fishing industry, they have well and truly been bent over. On the other hand they really should have known better
On one hand you have to feel sorry for the fishing industry, they have well and truly been bent over. On the other hand they really should have known better
I didn't say that it was, rather that if we went back far enough the impact of a passport was limited.
Only because it was government policy that native Americans had no right to their land.Given what those people then did to the previous residents of the lands that now comprise the US, I'm not sure that you'd want to cite that as any kind of example of migration being a good thing
Good. I think that is positive.
I don't see the big deal. Gibraltar is a tiny state with a tiny number of people realistically interested in living there.
It's Gibraltar that is choosing to modify its policy on the matter, having been placed in a position to
a) make itself attractive to British retirees to live in a warm place on the cheap, or
b) provide the best possible economic results for the state by opening its border with Spain and easing some decades of tension about said border.
That would be a bad thing for the people that live there.
So let's hope they don't collapse. Gibraltar has to do what it feels best for its own interests. I'm sure they are more than fed up of being used as some sort of political football by people who live 2,000 miles away.
Now if only the UK government was also of the mind to provide the best possible economic results for the state by reducing friction across our border with the EU and easing some years of friction and uncertainty about said border.
Well, quite.
It’s more likely that we will return Scotland to the Celts.
'lights blue touch paper and quickly retires'
Cloud Strife
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 2,962
This is politically very, very difficult. The negotiations are going on, on and on, but there are some key problems.
1. Who controls the Gibraltarian border? Gibraltar cannot join Schengen by itself, and Spain does not want Gibraltarian police controlling entry to Schengen. The preferred solution by Gibraltar is for Frontex to do the job, but Spain doesn't want to agree to Frontex doing the job on their behalf. The original plan is that Spain would be the 'guarantee' state for Gibraltar in Schengen, but Gibraltar cannot and will not agree to Spain controlling access to Gibraltar.
One solution mooted is that there will be two checks: one by Gibraltarian police, one by Spanish police. Gibraltar will be able to clear people into Gibraltar only, while travellers will need a positive decision from the Spanish police in order to move across the land border. It's unworkable in practice, not least because Gibraltar point blank refuses to allow Spanish police to operate in Gibraltar.
2. Customs controls. Spain does not want to surrender control of the land frontier without serious reform of the Gibraltarian tax system, which means moving to EU standards for excise duties and implementing VAT. This has been agreed in principle by Gibraltar, and Gibraltar is already quietly moving towards EU levels of taxation on alcohol/cigarettes, although there's a lot of pressure against their government from traders. But it's worth remembering that Gibraltar has only been 'clean' financially for a couple of decades at the most. In the early 1990s, Gibraltar was as dirty as it comes, even down to drug runners openly operating their vessels from Gibraltar. The Gibraltarian Government has also not been that enthusiastic about stopping cigarette exports, despite a law theoretically banning people from carrying more than 200 in the border area. Meanwhile, Gibraltar continues to import huge amounts of cigarettes, and the Gibraltarian (not Spanish!) border fence is also very easily crossed in the area of the Western Beach.
3. Gibraltar wants to issue residence permits and Schengen visas. There is a major problem here, because Gibraltar won't have the authority to issue Schengen visas. That means Spain will have to issue them, which will mean a de facto Spanish veto on travellers who might never enter Spain, such as those arriving on the direct Morocco-Gibraltar ferry. This is, again, politically impossible for Gibraltar. Gibraltarian visas are currently issued in Morocco by the British Embassy/consulates there, so this would essentially hand control of Gibraltar's visa policy to Spain.\
4. There are some other ancillary issues, such as pensions. Gibraltar does not pay Spanish residents the same pensions as people living in Gibraltar, even if they worked in Gibraltar for their whole lives.
As you can see, this is not a simple and straightforward decision. The Gibraltarian government would be voted straight out of office if they agreed to cede control of their borders to Spain, and the locals would rather have a tougher border than to accept any Spanish sovereignty over Gibraltar.
We already do. Gibraltar is not part of the CTA, so UK-Gibraltar flights are treated as any other non-CTA flight. The only 'but' is that British citizens aren't subject to restrictions on their stay within Gibraltar, unlike EU/non-EU citizens. But already, Gibraltar has different immigration rules and separate visas. For instance, EU citizens can work in Gibraltar quite easily, whereas this isn't the case in the UK. Neither the UK nor Gibraltar have shown the slightest bit of interest in Gibraltar joining the CTA, because the Spanish border is much more important than the UK-Gibraltar border.
We still will. This won't change, even if Gibraltar joins Schengen. The mooted plans are that non-Gibraltarian Brits will be issued with a residence permit automatically for Gibraltar, which will carry the same restrictions as any other non-EU citizen living in a Schengen state, i.e. they won't be able to live/work in Spain or other Schengen countries, but they will be able to visit for 90 in every 180 days. Long term stays are still a national (and not Schengen) competence, so nothing will change from our POV.
It is absolutely unworkable in practice. Gibraltar relies on a huge amount of labour crossing the border daily, which is why they have such a lax regime for EU citizens working in Gibraltar.
What will happen in all likelihood is that the current arrangements will continue as is, where Gibraltarians with Gibraltarian ID cards are permitted to continue across the border unhindered, while non-Gibraltarian Brits will continue to have their passports stamped. The major question is whether the La Linea border can cope with the Entry/Exit System and the requirement for every traveller to have their passports/ID cards scanned. It will suffice for pedestrians, but car traffic is a major problem, not least because Spain doesn't want to use the space in the border zone to create a large enough border crossing that would be on par with other external EU crossing.
There is one possibility in La Linea: that the EU will agree to maintain the current way of doing things. This is very possible, especially as the introduction of passport stamps for non-Gibraltarian Brits has gone through without much of an issue. There aren't that many Gibraltarians, and Gibraltar won't grant Gibraltarian status unless you've lived in Gibraltar for at least 10 years. I do not believe that Schengen is possible for Gibraltar, but Spain, Gibraltar and the EU should be able to agree to maintain the current state of affairs without much difficulty.
The Chief Minister of Gibraltar has already told Parliament that Spain has offered to maintain the status quo on the border, which means that non-Gibraltarian Brits will continue to have to abide by Schengen rules, while Gibraltarians will be de facto exempt. This, for me, is the most likely long term solution.
OzLoon
Member
Would that be before or after you give the six counties back?
But the majority of people in "the six counties" (Northern Ireland) don't want to be "given back" to become part of the Irish Republic.
Same as the majority of people in Gibraltar don't want to become part of Spain.
So there is no justification for either of these events happening.
And I don't think Spain has got any right to moral superiority in this matter, given that they have two enclaves in, er, Morocco, which they refused to cede to Morocco when it became an independent country in 1956.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
That majority is decreasing and in not many years there could be a majority for joining the Republic, at which point a referendum is required under the Good Friday Agreement. The way the UK government has treated Northern Ireland during Brexit only serves to accelerate that process.
This is just a way of justifying colonialism really. “We put a lot of British people on this land by force, now we have done an opinion poll and they like being governed by Britain. That’s democracy.”
This is a perfectly valid point and nobody should listen to Spain when it moans about former colonies!