GUWonder

Your post seems to be comparing two things when the comparison isn't even applicable for entries to the Schengen area under the current state and future state that prompted this thread.

Most of those nations that waive visa requirements for entry also waive visa type fees for some entry.

EPNR alone facilitates less mass surveillance and control of passengers than ETIAS in combination with it is intended to do.

The ETIAS fee will also cover some for less than between 5 and 10 years.

Which Schengen country has an arrangement for "paying for a VoA every time you go to a specific country" in the Schengen zone? It would be news to me.

WorldLux

I'm comparing internationally. Lots of nations adopted a VoA fee or a system, that has similarities to ESTA. Honestly I don't see why you get so worked up over this.

GUWonder

Given your responsiveness to this topic, are you going to tell us why you get so worked up over this?

Your post is comparing internationally between a state of affairs not applicable to the Schengen entries. I'm comparing the current and upcoming state of affairs for travel into the Schengen zone. When has the Schengen zone ever had a VoA fee? I'm saying the VoA fee is not something relevant to Schengen travelers, so it or something else being possibly "worse" doesn't really do anything other than try to divert attention from the upcoming change and what it means for passengers visiting the Schengen zone: a worse experience in the main, even if there are worse theoretical possibilities out there.

WorldLux

I don't think I am. I think that a system similar to ESTA (or any other comparable system) is a good idea (provided it is correctly set up).

As of now and AFAIK, the EU has no common database regarding entry into the EU for travelers that do not require a visa. In contrast to the EU, the US (and any nations that use such system) know exactly when a traveler misuses the visa free travel scheme to work, study, live in the EU. The introduction of said system seems therefore logical to me.

Regarding my comparison with VoA, I want to emphasize again the fact, that the trend in recent years was introducing advanced passenger information system/advanced passenger clearance systems.

Such a system has to be financed. The advantage of charging passenger in the same way ESTA does, is that the authorization is valid for a relatively long period of time and usually only limited by the validity of your passport (usually between 5 and 10 years). The alternative would be to make the charge part of the ticket (something many countries do), which in the end would be more expensive for travelers.

The major disadvantage of the system is - and that's defeating at least the political objective behind the intention of introducing such a system - that it doesn't take into account European citizens. Given the raising numbers of radicalized EU citizens, that's definitely putting a big hole in their plans.

GUWonder

Lick the finger and stick it in the wind to see which way the wind may blow:

Almost half of British voters favour passport checks with Ireland after Brexit

WilcoRoger

That's what you get with a one man one vote system...

It is fascinating to read the British press - they seem to have no clue, that there will be tough negotiations and the result of that must be approved by all 27 national governments.

“Consequently, the kind of deal that is most likely to prove electorally popular is one that maintains free trade but permits at least some limits on EU migration,”

The 27 nations couldn't care less what is "electorally popular" in Britain.

GUWonder

Electorally popular even beyond Britain.

ESTA/evisa/ETIAS, APIS and PNR monitoring type regimes are a way to permit additional effective limits on migration -- even limits on migration within the EU area. And this is an approach that is becoming increasingly popular in the EU too.

These kind of governmental approaches to travel are a de facto government appeal/response also to reactionary populist tendencies that have become increasingly widespread across the EU. Whether the excuse is crime (of some sort or another), vagrancy/begging, health care/educational/welfare system costs or not, much of that which is electorally popular in Britain seems to be also at least somewhat electorally popular elsewhere in the EU too.

WilcoRoger

I do not see it being electorally popular anywhere this side of the Channel to let Britain cherry pick the brexit terms.

GUWonder

Given the EU'a moves toward more comprehensive PNR surveillance and a push toward an EU/Schengen version of the American ESTA, I see this as an attempt on the mainland to have the customs/trade union but further control migration -- even migration from and within the EU. The UK doesn't seem all alone in that.

televisor

I welcome introducing this for US and Canadian citizens (maybe Australians too?).

Everyone else should be exempt though. They trust us so we can trust them.

FWIW the UK already has a Visa Waiver system - it is however per-entry.
https://www.gov.uk/get-electronic-visa-waiver

(On the brexit topic: I feel that's going to be providing a steady stream of laughs for they next few years...)

GUWonder

The UK's electronic visa waiver II program applies to only a handful of countries and requires uploading an image of the passport's biodata page. But I'm not sure it's a visa waiver of any sort if the eligible country's citizens change flight plans so as to travel to (or is it arrive in?) the U.K. within less than 48 hours. I can't see the UK/EU being so strict with US passport users.

flyerCO

Ireland isn't part of the Schengen area. Thus I have a hard time seeing the need to change the CTA agreement. It's not like there's not like there won't be some form of border control to enter IRL.

GUWonder

I know Ireland isn't part of the Schengen area. But as Ireland is not exiting the EU, Ireland will still have freedom of movement for EU/Schengen country citizens. And Ireland doesn't want to pay more for immigration exit control between Ireland and the UK. So what's the U.K. going to do with regard to the U.K.-IRL CTA travelers who are non-Irish and non-British but still EU/Schengen country passport users?

reclusive46

This is already an issue with non-eu visa holders of the UK or Ireland and neither seem to particularly care.

Its more of an honour system anyway as Non-Ireland born and Non-UK Born (It doesn't fully apply to British citizens born outside of the UK or Ireland) Irish and UK citizens are still supposed to travel with the appropriate passport etc. between the border. This is primarily because most other forms of ID (such as a driving licence) only show the place of birth, not citizenship. Admittedly this always seemed silly to me as its easy to be born in the UK but not be British.

GUWonder

But if the U.K. retaliated by wanting to go reciprocal -- under the hypothetical scenario of ordinary British citizen passport users having to get (and possibly pay for) an ETIAS -- people could cross from Ireland into the U.K. with a passport without having had gotten a hypothetical UK version of ETIAS. It's the circumvention of the electronic registration/payment scenario that would be largely new for non-Irish/non-British passport users going to the U.K. via/from Ireland.

When substantial money is on the table and security paranoia about Continentals runs high, government care about the possibilities increases.