To be annoyed that immigration is the main issue for most people in EU debate?

[susanketty]

Whether you are 'in' or 'out', I'm getting tired of immigration being the main issue for people - sure, it will have an impact, but brexit is not going to solve any problems with immigration that people perceive, and immigration fears does not seem to be to me a good enough reason to vote out. And voting in is not going to necessarily lead to a rush of immigrants.

We are not in the Schengen area, we have border control, and EU immigrants make a net contribution to our economy. Brexiteers often say they would like a Norway-esque agreement, which seems to me like all the problems (i.e., free movement of people) with none of the advantages other than being in the trade area (which we are already).

I just think there is more to the debate than immigration and it seems to me like it's been pushed to the front of the agenda to push more people to vote out due to fear.

The USA checks on entering are very thorough. perhaps we need more of these. I don't agree with people being here from the EU who are not paying their way, begging and sleeping rough.

US checks may be "thorough" but they are also ineffective. There are an estimated 5 million visa overstayers in the US including perhaps 500,000 who arrived in 2015 alone. All of these people passed "thorough" border checks. What's more despite supposedly thorough checks no one has any real idea how many there are - the above figures are based on polifact's assessment but they use old and incomplete data.

Most illegal immigration involves people who pass through border controls legally. Countries with a small population of illegal immigrants tend to be ones that no one would want to live in anyway.

wasonthelist exit checks were reintroduced last year see here:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11519524/Exit-checks-what-you-need-to-know.html
www.bbc.com/news/uk-32205970
and www.eurotunnel.com/uk/advance-passenger-information/
www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-passengers-leaving-the-uk/exit-checks-fact-sheet

I don't disagree - I was just correcting the factually incorrect assertion made upthread that we fully control our borders at present by checking everyone in and out when we plainly don't. It's a narrow but significant point unrelated to the causes and history of it.

I think we agree on that point, where we may disagree is on the viability of checking people in and out. The example was given above of a country (the US) with supposedly "thorough" checks which has no idea where several million overstayers are, or even how many of them there are.

Checking people in and out would be enormously costly, not just in terms of the budget to double (or more) your border force, but in political terms too. It would mean strict outward border controls in Ireland and the ports, and even then you'd be unable to keep tabs on anyone with more than one passport.

The UK has or should have a relatively manageable illegal immigration problem because apart from in Ireland there are no land borders and therefore would-be illegal entrants very largely enter through a single point (Heathrow).

*bolograph Your average Belgian/Brit doesn't have that experience or level of qualifications

Thank God you and your husband are able to selflessly save us from our ignorance.*

When your average Belgian or Brit has done 34 years as a nuclear submariner in the Royal Navy, got a B.Eng, MA, CEng, then you might have a point. I couldn't work at CERN as I gave physics up at 13 as I didn't understand it. Should I be able to work there without the requisite qualifications? Should I be paid to do so? Should I be able to work as a brain surgeon without the experience and qualifications necessary to do so?

scaryteacher those aren't border controls, it's just a data collection exercise, like when you give you passport details to the airline ahead of taking a flight.

Thanks Scary teacher - mine was a narrow point about the Border force scanning passports - exit controls not data gathering.

I am aware of the data grab from carriers (and the exemptions) - but no-one is machine-reading my passport into whatever the database they use is - and if I or the travel company make a transcription error on my passport number, there's no way to pick it up. Also, Airlines etc are not experts on passports and Visas. The government talks a good story on this, but there's no actual control. For a recent example, how about the partner of the Eastenders actor who murdered her and left the country? Found by Social Media, not Border Force who theoretically should have know where he'd gone. The Agency has been decidedly opaque about how this all works.

got a B.Eng, MA, CEng

Yes, I think we got the message.

therefore would-be illegal entrants very largely enter through a single point (Heathrow).

I think we're wandering well away from the topic now. I have no idea if Heathrow is the largest source - by definition it's a tricky issue to gain reliable stats on, but for straight-out illegal (undocumented) entrants, my suspicion would be the Ferry and Tunnel crossings from France - but I could be way off the mark.

I think I broadly agree on the cost vs problem issues - but my original response was because a "Remainer" was saying we have full control over our borders - which we plainly don't. One immutable truth in this debate is that in the event of Brexit we would have the power to determine our own criteria for entry in a way that isn't possible now. We can argue the toss about free movement vs trade - but we'd be able to make choices strictly in accordance with the interests of the UK in the event of Brexit.

Mistigri, no I'm not too young to remember heavily armed border controls between the UK and Ireland; in fact I grew up half an hour from one and crossed it regularly. I hardly think the border controls themselves led to violence,so not sure what point you're making there.

"we check people in and out"

what is the value of a check when as explained up thread the check is at the mercy of EU rules and the allowing of sharing important information.

Does any think we should allow rapists, murderers, criminal to freely move across Europe?

This is a very worrying article about Turkey joining the EU

www.independent.co.uk/voices/sir-richard-dearlove-is-right-visa-waivers-for-turks-are-dangerous-a7039911.html

The issue of visa-free entry of Turks to the EU should raise a number of important questions. It pushes the outer barrier to the entry of migrants, as well as Isis and al-Qaeda terrorists, further south and east to Turkey’s 717-mile long border with Iraq and Syria. More than twice the length of the French-German border, this is highly porous and abuts on the world’s biggest war zone.

There is something bizarre about EU policy when it comes to migration from this part of the world. It seems to be based on the supposition that refugees are in flight from the war in Syria, but in practice the battle zone is today far larger. The conflict is at its most intense in Syria, Iraq and south east Turkey, but there are at least seven wars and three serious insurgencies being fought out in the swathe of land between Pakistan and Nigeria. In Syria, Iraq and SE Turkey, with a total population of around 60 million, people fear that the only prospect is war and economic breakdown and want to get out.

The implementation of the visa-free regime in the 26-nation Schengen zone of the EU is currently being delayed by Turkish unwillingness to modify anti-terrorism laws that target all forms of criticism of the state. Nevertheless, EU officials speak confidently of the scheme going ahead with one saying that "it’s not the first time there has been quite provocative talk from the Turkish side, then we sat down and found a way forward.”

". One immutable truth in this debate is that in the event of Brexit we would have the power to determine our own criteria for entry in a way that isn't possible now. We can argue the toss about free movement vs trade - but we'd be able to make choices strictly in accordance with the interests of the UK in the event of Brexit"

^ exactly

I agree with you there was, and it seems like a cost saving exercise to make the carriers as opposed to the UKBA do this. The gov.uk link does however maintain that these are proper exit checks.

I have a block booking with dfds, and I am always a bit appalled that they aren't interested in who is travelling when I ring up to book a journey with them.

What's your problem Bolograph? You ignore the point yet again that allied to the qualifications, dh has a wealth of experience in his field that your average person won't have. The same applies in other fields. I couldn't be a brain surgeon, or work at CERN, as I don't have the qualifications or experience, and neither does the average person, so thus wouldn't be paid at their rates.

First of all, I hope we take who is coming in and out far more seriously Mother.

It seems the articles posted up thread were ignored. The border agency has been in crisis for years with a massive back log,

I suppose not everyone has worked in a highly pressurized frantic environment, like that. I have, and believe me, corners are cut.

There has been an over all relaxed attitude to people coming here on EU passports.

Have you gone through US passport control?

Its a lengthy process, lots of checks, questions and so on.They take their countries safety seriously.

I understand that. I would like the UK to go back to normal, serious passport control.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/european-union-makes-britain-literally-ungovernable-says-david-cameron-s-former-guru-a7042916.html

Steve Hilton, one of the Prime Minister’s oldest advisers, criticised the bloc’s bureaucracy and said it was “anti-enterprise”, “anti-market” and “anti-trade”. He added the EU removed control from Westminster and made Britain “literally ungovernable”.

His view, he said, was “based on a pragmatic, non-ideological assessment of how the EU operates, is that as long as we are members, our country cannot be ‘run’”. Mr Hilton was one of those who encouraged Mr Cameron to run for leadership of the party and his intervention is likely to come as a personal blow for the PM.

then they also scan your passport when you leave

Mother I don't know about the ports because I use them less, but there is no scanning of passports for departing passengers at airports. I fly all the time though - came through Heathrow on Friday - and once you've entered your API data, there is no passport check until the gate, when an airline employee checks that your passport matches the name and passport number on your boarding card. It's data gathering, not border control. There have been some ad hoc border controls in recent months but it's far from systematic.

That's not to say that I think more border controls are needed or useful. Theoretically, Britain has a fairly easy task of border control - it's an island and most potential illegal immigrants enter through one point (Heathrow). It's still difficult. Now imagine your task when you are trying to keep tabs on the comings and goings of your near neighbours too! I don't know how many flights a day arrive from Africa or the Indian subcontinent (historically the source of much illegal immigration) but the number of arrivals from these places is dwarfed by the number of european passengers, and that's before you even start counting ferry and cruise ship passengers. A system that can track all these people with reasonable accuracy (you'll never have total accuracy unless you close the Irish border and ban dual citizenship) would cost a frightening amount of money and probably would have very little impact on illegal immigration - while deterring business and tourist travellers.

It is all about intelligence shared between countries (esp in the EU - a luxury we might not be able to enjoy once the leavers have their way). Yes we will, as we gather intelligence we share with the Europeans. If they want access to what we have, they will have to provide access to theirs, as to do otherwise would really be cutting off their noses to spite their faces, given we have Five Eyes intel, and they don't.

Mother I think these checks are as you say mainly to help check passenger lists against lists of known "undesirables" or people who are wanted for crimes. The airline gate checks are very cursory - they are just to ensure that you are carrying a passport or ID card that matches your API details and has a photograph that looks roughly like you. It's possible, though not recommended, to go through the gate with a passport that doesn't completely match your API (if you made a minor data entry error). It's not at all like an incoming border control check, where a trained border guard inspects your passport for signs of tampering and scans it.

I find this issue interesting because there's a lot of talk about "securing borders" when no one actually seems to be able to say how it will be done, what it will cost, and what the benefits will be.

Motheroffourdragons No one has ever scanned my passport on leaving the UK - and although my last trip to Paris on Eurostar was in February last year, it wasn't scanned then. It was scanned at Gare De Nord (as it always is) by the French (because unlike us they do have exit controls) and then by the UK officials for UK entry. Are you saying the UK border force are now checking on exit at St Pancras?

Misti it's an island and most potential illegal immigrants enter through one point (Heathrow). you've said this more than once - do you have any evidence (I am not trying to be a git and argumentative about it - I am genuinely interested)?