Eurostar services to Amsterdam and others

[johnnychips]

If Eurostar trains or DB trains run from places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt to London, posters have suggested that UK passport/immigration control would have to be instituted at the terminal stations, intermediate stations like Rotterdam, Antwerp, Cologne, Aachen, Liege etc. with appropriate segregation measures.

Why not:
- arrive in Brussels Midi/Zuid. Schengen passengers get off. UK immigration gets on and checks passports of remaining passengers, while
- Train messes about and reverses into one of the Eurostar platforms, and passengers from there board (who will have already been checked)

Of course this will add about 30 mins to time, and not remove Lille loophole (but there probably would be 30 mins connecting times anyway if there were no through trains beyond Brussels).

Biggest flaws with this idea is that I don't know if the manoeuvres at Brussels would block other trains and the existing passengers on train would not have had baggage screened.

Of course this will not be necessary in the reverse direction, as there is French passport control at St Pancras.

 

[dvboy]

I think the simple solution is to have the border controls for both departures and arrivals on the UK side. Anyone who attempts to enter the country illegally gets put straight back on the next Eurostar in the opposite direction.

We have it at airports when arriving in the UK, so why not rail?

Segregating departing passengers at continental stations into those using the tunnel and those not, means you have to segregate the train too. This appears more impractical to me.

 

[jon0844]

As more routes are created, it would make sense to have border checks done in the UK.

There is at least a lot of room in arrivals to fit it in, as loads of space is just sitting empty. Perhaps that was always considered a possibility for the future?

 

[cle]

Asylum claims on British soil?

Best way is passport checks through the train by EU officers who disembark at Lille and then get back on other trains.

Would be complimented by passport checks at St Pancras for departures - and arrivals from stations without immigration only.

So Brussels originating, Disney, Paris, Ski, Avignon E* trains - as per today, no arrivals checks. DB/new E* routes - checks.

 

[WestCoast]

Asylum claims on British soil?

Best way is passport checks through the train by EU officers who disembark at Lille and then get back on other trains..

Well, everyone arriving on planes or ferriers is processed on arrival, so I don't see why asylum should be such an issue, although I guess the passengers arriving at St Pancras have been on British soil for a while.

In the days before Schengen, the EuroCity trains in mainland Europe always had onboard checks, sometimes the train was stationary and sometimes it wasn't.

 

[jon0844]

Asylum claims on British soil?

Yes, I am aware of this being an issue - assuming so many people still want to please asylum in the UK.

Best way is passport checks through the train by EU officers who disembark at Lille and then get back on other trains.

That would mean far more officers, which increases costs considerably. You also discourage future growth of services, as it's not likely to be particularly cheap to have officers travelling around (and all the contingencies required to cope with cancelled/delayed trains, stopover time etc).

Nice idea, but probably not workable now - even if it was the way things were done at the beginning.

 

[WestCoast]

Yes, I am aware of this being an issue - assuming so many people still want to please asylum in the UK.

Isn't "securing the borders" against terrorists and asylum seekers the main reason banded about for not joining Schengen?

Personally, I don't get the bit about terrorists!

EU law says they should claim asylum in the first EU country they enter - which is NOT the UK if you're coming on the train! :roll:

 

[jon0844]

No, but they presumably still do - and it's not as if the French had been trying to stop them getting over to the UK before?

 

[WestCoast]

No, but they presumably still do - and it's not as if the French had been trying to stop them getting over to the UK before?

Well from the BBC (or was it Channel 4?) documentary that was shown a few years ago, they can claim in France en français, bien sûr.

I think the accommodation in France for asylum seekers is, how should I put it, basic.

London apparently was thought of as Babylon-on-Thames compared to Calais. Many enter the EU through Greece and should claim there, but hmm I wonder why they don't do that? Asylum shouldn't be about economic factors, it's for persecution only, which is why I have very little sympathy for these people in many cases. They are abusing the system and are making it harder for genuine persecution cases.

 

[brianthegiant]

Surely the same issue with people claiming Asylum exists with people travelling here by Air who arrive on UK soil before the borders agency checks?

Isn't the other reason for having the borders agency posts abroad, because of the risk of people trying to stop the train and jump off in Kent, as happened recently with someone who was being repatriated by E*.

Agree travelling checks would be costly. Looks like the current trend is towards more checks at St Pancras. On E* You would still have passports checked on exit by French, belgian etc border control, which presumably would filters out some of those without suitable ID?

 

[Greenback]

Hmm. The problem with income tax is that those on the highest incomes don't pay it, because they can afford tax avoidance schemes, and there is the growing black market. Whether you like it or not, we are seeing a gradual shift away from taxation on income towards taxation linked to your environmental impact. This is a relatively low-intervention way for the government to achieve our environmental treaty commitments.
Lets not forget that this tax on aviation, does help to level the playing field with rail, which presumably does pay tax on its fuel consumption?

I'm not against environmental taxes, and I'm not against taxes such as VAT. There is no perfect way for the state to raise money, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. I would welcome more transparency though, and I'd prefer not to see income tax cuts being cancelled out by NI rate rises - to most people they are the same thing when they are taken at source.

I agree that air travel needs to pay its own way, but surely it needs to be a level playing field and not simply move all air travel abroad - with people finding ways to avoid the tax by getting separate flights to mainland Europe airports, taking the train or whatever.

Our economy will be hit in the long run, and that doesn't help us - nor does it actually cut air travel which I presume was the aim.

That is a valid point. Like the levels of duty, it simply serves to drive people abroad.

I doubt people on the highest incomes avoid all tax, but I'd be happier for them to pay less tax (as a percentage, which means they'd still pay a lot overall - but not lose 50% which only means companies will have to up their salaries, at the expense of other things no doubt) and keep the money in the UK, then spend that money that goes back into the UK economy.

I'm not so sure that someone is likely to be happy to pay tax at 40%, but not at 50% (especially if the higher rate is only temporary). Yes, some people will prefer to live abroad if taxes go up a lot, but my gut instinct is that the very high earners will not be affected a lot by changes in tax rates, as they will have set themselves up in a variety of ways to minimise their tax liabilities.

If someone earns millions each year and then splashes the cash, let's encourage them to do it here - supporting our businesses. The problem is that I am sure many people who are/become rich (say, winning £45m on the Euromillions) may well think it's time to leave the UK.

I would certainly consider leaving the UK if I won £45 million, but that would be more down to the weather and lifestyle I could enjoy abroad than the tax rates!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well from the BBC (or was it Channel 4?) documentary that was shown a few years ago, they can claim in France en français, bien sûr.

I think the accommodation in France for asylum seekers is, how should I put it, basic.

London apparently was thought of as Babylon-on-Thames compared to Calais. Many enter the EU through Greece and should claim there, but hmm I wonder why they don't do that? Asylum shouldn't be about economic factors, it's for persecution only, which is why I have very little sympathy for these people in many cases. They are abusing the system and are making it harder for genuine persecution cases.

I agree, economic factors should have no link with conomic factors. However, I think that not all of those whop claim asylum are in danger of death, torture or persecution where they have come from. They ar eeconomic migrants who are trying to take advantage of international law. Some may not even nationals of the country they claim to have left.

 

[EWS 58038]

I think solutions like this will mean that Liege, Aachen, maybe even Schipol and Antwerp, get canned. I would have thought Antwerp would make sense though.

Well, Schiphol airport with it's 6 platform station is already close to capacity and a stop for the London bound train has not been envisaged by any operator, as is Antwerp central. Only stops will be Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Brussels and perhaps Lille.

Furthermore a new terminal will need to be build in Amsterdam, and the only platform I can think of will be 15a.

 

[brianc_li]

Isn't the long term strategy EWS that Amsterdam Zuid will become the International hub once the Nord/Zuid line is up and running?