E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

No, it is who are confused. Border controls are fine, no one is doubting that. What is the problem is that EEA ID cards are valid travel documents to enter UK or Gibraltar, and that is defined by the freedom of movement part of EEA. UK/Gibraltar can't demand passport from a person with EEA ID document, as they are travel documents within EEA with legal power equal to a passport (within EEA).

Anyway, no point in arguing, most likely in 2 years it won't be relevant anyway. Plus Gibraltar economy will be ruined by the loss of financial service passporting (one third of Gibraltar economy) and customs of the hard EU border.

 

If that was the case then EEA ID cards, or similar, would've been issued when the treaty of Paris was first signed in 1951 as that's when the freedom of movement part was written.

 

All very correct. In addition, Gib has nothing to gain from being problematic to those trying to enter. The Spanish wouldn't deny entry to those displaying a valid passport or ID card, and neither would Gib. This is what makes me question that news story, perhaps their card was expired or some other such technicality that would ruin a good story.

The whole issue of the border with the queueing is that Spain is able to enforce border checks of any strength it so desires, and just as long as they don't deny entry they're legally in the clear, so Gibraltar's complaints fall on deaf ears. Once out of the EU Spain holds all the cards which, for Gibraltarians, is terrifying.

 

Just to make it clear for Corky42, ID card can be used not because UK or Gibraltar was nice enough to allow others to use ID documents, but because as i said, it is part of the free movement directive :

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0077:0123:en:PDF
Article 5, Right of Entry, section 1 :

And last time i checked, 2004/38/EC applies to both Gibraltar and UK (Uk implemented it in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_(European_Economic_Area)_Regulations_2006 )

So does Gibraltar :
http://www.gibraltarlaws.gov.gi/articles/1962-12o.pdf
EEA Rights – Entry and Residence.

So let's hope it was just some misunderstanding by those tourist guides, because otherwise Gibraltar would be in deep trouble.

 

So what you're saying is that EU law stands at the border and decides if each national passport or other document that establishes someones identity and nationality is valid?

 

Border control officer does have a list of valid EEA ID documents, most of which also have Machine Readable Zone, which then can be checked against the European database. Last time i checked, that is their job.

 

So in other words if you're not part of schengen like the UK and Gibraltar you check peoples documents as they cross the border and can refuse entry if you think the documents that establishes their identity and nationality is invalid.

That's not breaking any EU law, that's border control doing what their meant to be doing, controlling the border.

 

Yes, but they are not allowed to refuse an entry to a person with valid EEA travel documents unless they present a danger to a safety of that country. Simply put, this is not USA where immigration officer can turn you around at airport and send you back to Europe just because he doesn't like the way you look. In EEA, the border control officer actually has to have reason to turn you back.

Anyway, no point in discussing this further.

 

Yes and that reason can be that he doesn't consider your document to be valid or because the politician in charge of immigration tells them not to accept x, y, or z, the hints in the name "border" "control".

 

Major logical flaw in the a above. Validity of the document is not something that is considered or up to the eye of the 'beer holder'. Rather validity of the document stems from the authority that issued it - unless the border control could say the documents were falsified, they can't say that they are invalid (assuming expiry dates were all fine and dandy). Ergo they broke EU law


Also reason needs to be lawful. faugusztin was right, maybe there is no point trying to explain 'rule of law' to people living in the land of 'common law'

 

So you're saying that if made a fake £5 note that a shop couldn't refuse to take it because their not allowed to pass judgment on whether it's a valid £5 note.

Basically what people seem to be saying is that border control is pointless because even if they suspect the documents that establishes someone identity and nationality is invalid they can't refuse entry on those grounds.

And the facts seem to confirm that refusing EU nationals entry into the UK, and by extension Gibraltar, is not breaking the law.

 

Nobody is denying that an EU national can be denied entry to the UK or Gibraltar - but only if their identity document, be it a passport or ID card, is invalid. It could simply be expired, or it could be falsified, which are both grounds for refusing entry.

The UK and Gibraltar simply cannot refuse entry to an EU national displaying a valid document, and that is one of the arguments that characterised the Leave campaign in 'taking back control of our borders'.

Our government cannot change this until we leave the EU, end of story.

 

You seem to be forgetting that EU nationals can also be refused entry because of public policy, public security or public health reasons.

You can repeat the claims of the leave campaign that the UK and Gibraltar simply cannot refuse entry to an EU national displaying a valid document however the facts disagree. But hey don't let facts get in you way, how about we ask our then Home Secretary.

 

I should have clarified then - only refused entry if not in possession of valid ID, and are not a walking biohazard or terrorist.

If an EU national is not a threat to the UK, the UK is obliged to let them in on production of valid ID, otherwise the whole 'freedom of movement' concept is in tatters.

 

Or for any reason the government chooses as long as it's public policy.

 

That doesn't mean 'any reason'. You're quoting EU laws that exist but there are no specific examples that I can find, or that you have provided, of it actually happening in the UK, or anywhere else in the EU, where a government has created a policy that blocks out some or all EU nationals.

 

Yes it does mean any reason as all UK law is public policy and as long as it was nondiscriminatory it could be anything, if you want an example it would be the entirety of UK law, as Theresa May put it you're once again conflating immigration policy and free movement with control of our borders.

If you want an example of that conflation you only have to look at the immigration numbers of non-EU nationals that we supposedly have control over, it's not whether we do or don't have control of our borders that's the cause or effect, it's our public policies that's the cause and effect.

Something that's further reinforced by most MP's involved in government and brexit saying that EU migration is going to remain unchanged even after we leave the EU and supposedly regain control of our borders.

 

Something that the Leave Alliance expanded on in their Flexcit (how to Brexit sensibly and realistically) proposal. Immigration is not something that a government can 'control' by border controls or public policy; it is an inevitable result of global economics, and its flow can only be managed by economic policy. As such the Leave Alliance said that immigration control is a stupid reason for Brexit.

Which is why nobody ever got to hear about their Brexit plan.

 

I just wanted to clarify as it seems EvilMerc, like i would guess many people, is conflating the issue of immigration with border control and expects the the government to create a policy that blocks out some or all EU nationals at the border, something that very few government around the world do.

However i feel it needs spelling out that not only would a specific policy that blocked people from certain regions from entering a country likely be against most counties laws, as has been seen with Trumps proposed travel ban on not Muslim countries, it would also be cruel, almost impossible to implement and result in economic suicide.

Firstly to implement such a plan would mean border control officers counting every single person entering the country and then refusing entry once a particular number has been reached, are you really going to refuse entry to half a family because you've reach your quota for the month/year or tell someone how their life saving operation is going to have to wait because the quotas been reached so their surgeon can't enter the country.

Not only that but you open yourself up to the possibility of countless accusation of discrimination if you don't deal with immigration on a case by case basis, as Trump has demonstrated with his blanket ban on not Muslim countries for what he claims are security concerns, the very reason it's being challenged in the courts is because he said on the campaign trail that he would ban Muslims from entering the country and so people are rightly (IMO) questioning if it's really because of security concerns or if he's just discriminating against a particular religion.

Lastly setting a quota on how many people can enter each month/year would mean companies being faced with the potential of staff shortages and ultimately having to go out of business because they can't get the people to do the work, this wouldn't be something they could combat by throwing money at the problem as they do now by taking advantage of the Intra-Company Transfer rules or recruiting from abroad, it would have the same effect as limiting the import of crude oil products or other resources.

Instead the government introduces public policy in an attempt to reduce, and i can't believe I'm going to use this term, the pull-factor and should also be enforcing the current rules and laws such as deporting people who've not found work within 3 months and are unable to support themselves and other powers that governments of all colors has failed to use for what, based on their comments about EU immigration remaining largely unchanged after we leave the EU, now seem obvious reasons.

Apologises for the rather long post/rant it just get's my goat when people point the finger of blame at what (IMO) are the wrong people.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-stunned-as-uk-born-children-denied-residency