Lille Loophole

[radamfi]

Unfortunately, it seems that quite a few Eurostar trains to Brussels now stop at all three stations.

Look at the new timetable from 11 December: the first train is later at 0650 and stops at Ebbsfleet, Ashford, Calais and Lille!

 

[WestCoast]

They don't want asylum, they really want to come in undetected and get jobs illegally, which by all accounts seems dead easy to do..

Indeed, asylum should only be granted, by definition, to those who are facing persecution in their origin countries and not for economic reasons.

Of course, this does beg the question, why Britain for illegal jobs?

It's relevant as the 'Lille loophole' is seen as such a concern, what is the mindset of the Border Agency?

 

[johnnychips]

Doesn't surprise me really, since London and Paris are both major business and leisure destinations, whereas Brussels is more dependent on business and diplomatic trade.

I think Eurostar or indeed DB expanding direct services beyond Brussels will be the key. However, this border issue won't disappear. This could become the Rotterdam, Liege, Brussels, Lille and Calais loopholes!

Quite. Unless a Koln-Aachen-Liege-Brussels-Lille-London service is 'pick-up only' as far as Lille AND with UK border checks installed at Koln, Aachen and Liege...which would make it uneconomic... the only solution seems to be either passport checking on arrival at St Pancras which would be really annoying, or on-train passport checks after departing Lille.

I just wonder how much this 'Lille loophole' was used...perhaps it was known about but not worth the effort to plug...just as not every vehicle can be checked at Calais, maybe it was't considered worth the cost/effort/manpower. But now everyone knows its existance, I suppose something will have to be done.

 

[jon0844]

Of course, this does beg the question, why Britain for illegal jobs?

Maybe it is because we don't have ID cards? It's quite easy to be anonymous in this country. If your employer isn't raided, I'd imagine you're just fine for some considerable time. If you simply stay at home, it's even better.

And the second reason is that when you ARE caught, there's a good chance you'll be bailed and can disappear again. Thus, there's every incentive to come over here than another country where they may be much stricter.

I have no idea how things have changed or tightened up in recent years though. Nor do I know if people have decided that Britain is screwed and they're staying away. A lot of other EU citizens, like the Poles, seem to be going home as the economy has improved there.

The problem is the illegals pay no tax and don't make any attempt to integrate in society. These are the ones that cause idiots like Emma West to go on her racist rant on the tram, when it's fair to say that nobody wants them - even the foreigners who have moved here or are visiting quite legally.

Quite. Unless a Koln-Aachen-Liege-Brussels-Lille-London service is 'pick-up only' as far as Lille AND with UK border checks installed at Koln, Aachen and Liege...which would make it uneconomic... the only solution seems to be either passport checking on arrival at St Pancras which would be really annoying, or on-train passport checks after departing Lille.

Passport checks on entry at St Pancras wouldn't be that hard. There's plenty of room, but it doesn't solve the problem of people still coming and claiming asylum - as against being refused entry BEFORE they travel.

As long as the desks are staffed properly, and they get the new technology (like the electronic immigration booths, which will replace IRIS) to work reliably, it shouldn't cause much of a delay at all.

 

[johnnychips]

Passport checks on entry at St Pancras wouldn't be that hard. There's plenty of room, but it doesn't solve the problem of people still coming and claiming asylum - as against being refused entry BEFORE they travel.

As long as the desks are staffed properly, and they get the new technology (like the electronic immigration booths, which will replace IRIS) to work reliably, it shouldn't cause much of a delay at all.

If I were coming to England for economic reasons, assuming I had all the information, I would not want to claim asylum. The asylum processing centres seem very unpleasant places - the aim would be to sneak in and, as you said, easily disappear.

You could reinstitute passport control at St Pancras, but that would either mean a high manpower cost, or 10-20 minute delays; and would greatly cheese off the 99.5% of legal passengers who will resent being checked twice.

 

[jon0844]

You wouldn't need to check in France or Belgium (or indeed Germany, Netherlands etc) that way - and you'd simply charge Eurostar (or whoever) to return people like with airlines.

It's not an ideal solution, but it would solve this problem. There aren't that many trains arriving at once, so I am sure it would never get as busy or congested as an airport. Most people will be EU citizens, and most will have chip enabled passports, so as long as they don't scrimp on desks/machines it shouldn't be much of a delay at all.

 

[stuartmoss]

It's been years since I was on Eurostar, but last time I did was a journey from Lille to Waterloo, and immigration officers walked down the train checking everyone's passport, don't they do that now?

 

[WestCoast]

For the foreseeable future at least, the UK government isn't going to adopt national ID cards or sign the Schengen Agreement like our neighbouring nations across the Channel. So, pull the UKBA staff from France and Belgium and base them at St Pancras and Ebbsfleet/Ashford (don't forget them!). Adequate staffing levels with sufficient EU lanes need to be implemented. Also, those e-gates for chipped EU passports seem to help with the queues.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's been years since I was on Eurostar, but last time I did was a journey from Lille to Waterloo, and immigration officers walked down the train checking everyone's passport, don't they do that now?

Not unless they've got a tip off I would say - may even have been a suspect using the 'Lille loophole!'.

 

[johnnychips]

You wouldn't need to check in France or Belgium (or indeed Germany, Netherlands etc) that way - and you'd simply charge Eurostar (or whoever) to return people like with airlines.

It's not an ideal solution, but it would solve this problem. There aren't that many trains arriving at once, so I am sure it would never get as busy or congested as an airport. Most people will be EU citizens, and most will have chip enabled passports, so as long as they don't scrimp on desks/machines it shouldn't be much of a delay at all.

I thought about what you wrote a lot. At the moment, with really just four origins for Eurostar (Paris, Brussels, Lille, Calais) the check in the foreign country makes sense, so potential illegals can be turned away before reaching Britain, notwithsdtanding the Lille loophole.

However IF DB want to run services from Koln or even Frankfurt, Eurostar or another operator wants to extend to Amsterdam (probably stopping at Antwerp and Rotterdam) or further services into France as well as the odd seasonal Eurodisney and ski services, then really passport control at the destination (St Pancras, Ebbsfleet, Ashford) or on-train is the only solution.

But then if you treat the train operators like plane operators, somehow they will have to instigate passport checks before boarding to avoid being fined - is it £1000 or £2000 for illegal passenger carried? It's easier with a plane - there's only one gate or door.

My brain hurts.

 

[jon0844]

It is a potential mess - and one that will get worse when we extend services beyond Paris and Brussels (anyone ready for those sleepers we've been talking about elsewhere?!).

Having checks at St Pancras does mean losing one key benefit, which is keeping people out of the country in the first place. The problem is that it doesn't work if a train stops on the way and so people can claim to be getting off there, making it impossible for the UK Border Agency to say 'Stop this man/woman - s/he may continue on to the UK!'.

Intelligence is one thing, but that will just mean a lot of people slip through. And those people who do slip through aren't even known about - so don't go on any records.

I laughed when I saw the border agency doing the checks on lorries and claiming that they must be working as eventually there's less people trying to get through. Either a) the people gave up trying as they kept getting caught or b) They kept trying and eventually got through so they were in fact now in Britain.

I always figured B was more likely, and assumed that the UKBA knew that too.

 

[WestCoast]

But then if you treat the train operators like plane operators, somehow they will have to instigate passport checks before boarding to avoid being fined - is it £1000 or £2000 for illegal passenger carried? It's easier with a plane - there's only one gate or door.

Something that may be forgotten is that the Schengen Agreement stipulates that there must be an exit control leaving Schengen. So, the Belgian, French (and German and the Dutch if expanded) would still have to check Passports/ID cards at their terminals when leaving the country. This is probably why the current set-up exists.

The UK has no such requirement for those leaving the country. This is why there are only French officers when departing from St Pancras. The British desks are left unmanned. However, in Paris, for example, there is an exit control for France and an inbound control for Britain in quick succession.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Listening to the Radio 4 programme about the Lille loophole now. A British journalist uses the Lille loophole. He bought a ticket as far as Lille. At Brussels, UKBA did not want to see his documents because he had a ticket only as far as Lille. And he stayed on the train as far as St Pancras without a ticket or showing his passport.

You can hear his success in showing up Eurostar and UKBA here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/r4report

 

[Holly]

Got a ticket check for the first time ever after arriving at St. Pancras (from Brussels) on Tuesday afternoon though I have heard of this happening before from others. It was UKBA staff doing the checking.

Not even illegal however to hold more than one valid ticket covering any particular journey. So a person could be checked on their Schengen ticket and be an unchecked no-show on a UK ticket. Yet have valid tickets to show at every point in the journey. Or swap tickets with a partner who holds a UK ticket but alights at Lille.

Married women who are US-EU dual citizens have faced a converse issue for years when visiting home by air. US Passport in married name, EU passport in maiden name. Some security systems can't cope with people who seem to arrive without ever having departed. Others can.

As someone else wrote, the simplest way to solve the problem is to make it not a problem.

 

[radamfi]

One argument against checking passports on arrival in the UK is that someone could pull the emergency door handle somewhere in Kent, jump off the train and escape into the UK. This can only be stopped by passport checks before the tunnel. This isn't a problem on aircraft as not many people are willing to jump out of the plane!

 

[dancan]

It's been years since I was on Eurostar, but last time I did was a journey from Lille to Waterloo, and immigration officers walked down the train checking everyone's passport, don't they do that now?

Just what I was thinking. I used to use Eurostar a lot in the late 90s (London<=>Paris), and in those days the passport checks Paris=>London were done by UKPA staff on the train. Not sure why this changed, but with a system like that you have--by definition--a captive audience, and if it were done after Lille then--again by definition--all passengers are destined for the UK. The problem with the current setup (i.e. passport checks in Brussels before boarding) is that the check is relying on the passengers' honesty about where they're getting off. If the check were done on the train, reality would trump honesty.

 

[brianthegiant]

If I were coming to England for economic reasons, assuming I had all the information, I would not want to claim asylum. The asylum processing centres seem very unpleasant places - the aim would be to sneak in and, as you said, easily disappear.

'easily disappear' hmm, and enter a world of exploitation by endless dodgy characters.

Whilst the life of an illegal migrants is no doubt painted as a sort of easy ride by the tabloid press, I suspect the reality is a lot less pleasant.

I also think that the issue of immigration is stirred up by certain political groups to distract political attention away from the real economic problems, for which there is no real causal link with migration.

Lets not forget the convenient vilification of Jews in 30s Germany as a way to distract attention from economic woes and create a common enemy upon which to apportion blame.

Lets not forget also that people go to extreme lengths to migrate because they were unable to support themselves and their families back home. Just the same as British people also go to work abroad to support their families.

I would add that if those of us living in relative affluence in western countries paid 'developing' countries a fairer share of the final price of what we import there would be less need for economic migration in the first place.
If you look at non fair-trade commodity goods (coffee, sugar rice etc) see what cut tesco takes then all the other middlemen then look at what is left for the farmer/miner/etc, then it starts to look like a no-brainer to try & move to a richer country.

Dont get me wrong I'm not trying to justify illegal migration here, just to say the issues are complex & those who do migrate are just the victims of the capitalist system rather than the perpetrators of the underlying problem.

 

[jon0844]

How Germany blamed everything on the Jews is not the same as our obvious problem with illegal immigrants - many of which we don't even know about!

Some are brought in my gangs and forced to work in terrible conditions, while others can clearly come over and happily disappear - supported by others in the community. These people contribute nothing to the economy, and can't pay taxes even if they want to (I guess they could pay VAT though, on cash-in-hand money).

I am not against immigration, but everyone who comes here needs to be legal. They can then contribute to society properly, which also means that if they need benefits then they should be entitled too. The legitimate immigrants would also get a much easier ride if they weren't tarred with the same brush as the illegals.

 

[shinkansen1966]

...while others can clearly come over and happily disappear - supported by others in the community...

To what extend would mandatory ID cards help combat this problem ?

 

[jon0844]

I don't know.

 

[williamn]

There must be a simple solution and one where it could still be used by passengers to and from Brussels / Lille. Cross border trains are not exactly a rareity in the world...

 

[jon0844]

Depends how you want to solve it (or what it is you're seeking to solve). Have thorough checks for those who stay on, thus solving this isolated issue, or just sign up to the Schengen Agreement and have done with.

 

[brianthegiant]

How Germany blamed everything on the Jews is not the same as our obvious problem with illegal immigrants - many of which we don't even know about!

Some are brought in my gangs and forced to work in terrible conditions, while others can clearly come over and happily disappear - supported by others in the community. These people contribute nothing to the economy, and can't pay taxes even if they want to (I guess they could pay VAT though, on cash-in-hand money).

I am not against immigration, but everyone who comes here needs to be legal. They can then contribute to society properly, which also means that if they need benefits then they should be entitled too. The legitimate immigrants would also get a much easier ride if they weren't tarred with the same brush as the illegals.

I agree with the 2nd 2 paragraphs, my point about the first, is simply that I think immigration has been used both currently and historically as a political distractor. the economic impact of tax dodging and casino banking in recent years are far greater than the impact of illegal immigration, yet the latter tends to attract greater outrage in the tabloid newspapers.

 

[jon0844]

The problem is that when people try and talk about immigration, people invariably hijack the discussion and turn it into some racist/xenophobic argument - to suit their own agendas. Sadly, sections of the media (often reflecting the opinion of their ignorant readers) then make scapegoats out of people, which makes it worse.

A few years back, the Polish took all the blame for everything - but these were (mostly) people working hard, doing jobs that some of 'us natives' had deemed to be beneath them. Then, the media gets to blame them for taking our jobs! Yeah, right. If they hadn't come, how many of these jobs wouldn't have been done at all?

 

[b0b]

To what extend would mandatory ID cards help combat this problem ?

It doesn't - in the USA right now and you are required to show proof you are authorized to work in the US whenever you start a new job.

It's easily defeated - by employers that pay cash under the table, or with fake documentation.

 

[jon0844]

Then you must impose incredibly hefty fines, or worse, for those who happily employ people illegally.

Oh, and you actually have the resources to go and enforce the law too! Otherwise you might just think that some people are turning a blind eye to it....

 

[shinkansen1966]

or just sign up to the Schengen Agreement and have done with.

Agreed.

Because at the moment, I'm starting to wonder what difference being outside Schengen actually makes.

 

[jon0844]

Is Ireland part of the agreement? Can you fly/sail there from elsewhere in Europe, then walk over to northern Ireland and then get into the rest of GB with no further checks?

 

[radamfi]

As with the UK, there is no open border at Irish airports from the Schengen area. In fact, all passengers need to pass through passport control even when flying from UK to Irish airports whereas flights in the opposite direction usually end up at the domestic section. Presumably boats from the Schengen area are checked. I believe they even check some boats from the UK.

Bizarrely, flights to Gatwick South Terminal arrive at the International part but passengers pass through a narrow corridor if they have come from Ireland, avoiding passport control. You need to present your boarding card to go this way. Anyone could easily print out a fake Ryanair boarding pass from Dublin to avoid detection if they arrived at the same time as a flight from Dublin.

Clearly, Ireland can't join the Schengen area without the UK joining because of the open border between NI and ROI.

 

[jopsuk]

Is Ireland part of the agreement? Can you fly/sail there from elsewhere in Europe, then walk over to northern Ireland and then get into the rest of GB with no further checks?

Ireland is not part of the open borders scheme because it has a seperate bilateral semi open border with the UK. One of the sticking points for either the UK or Irleand to fully join Schengen is that we need to do so together. Remeber, we have a land border that has no fences.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Clearly, Ireland can't join the Schengen area without the UK joining because of the open border between NI and ROI.

And some in the UK complain that other EU countries are telling us what do to. Here Ireland's border policy is determined by what the UK does.