WARNING: Flying into UK Weds 30th Nov? Change your arrangements...
Dec 2nd, 2011, 12:19 AM
#42
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From reports there was 80% of the usual number of passengers but only 66% of the usual number of passport officers - and most of them were doing it for the first time. So clearly they were dealing with more passengers per person than normal.
What hasn't been explained is why checking was quicker & hence the queues were minimal.
What hasn't been explained is why checking was quicker & hence the queues were minimal.
Dec 2nd, 2011, 01:16 AM
#43
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 20,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>What hasn't been explained is why checking was quicker & hence the queues were minimal.<<
First rule of being a Home Secretary: you can't win. Teresa May is going to have yet more awkward questions to answer (assuming anyone has the gumption to ask them).
First rule of being a Home Secretary: you can't win. Teresa May is going to have yet more awkward questions to answer (assuming anyone has the gumption to ask them).
Dec 2nd, 2011, 01:55 AM
#44
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only a small number of people are stopped at the U.K. border and refused entry. More are people are stopped when they apply for visas, but many arrive illegally but stay on after the permitted time.
So what are border officials actually doing? They are checking the passports of legitimate travellers, and at least 50% will be returning British citizens. Occasionally they will stop someone entering the country, or will place some restrictions on the time they can stay.
If the queues were shorter on the day of the strike, it can either be that the temporary staff were more efficient than the permanent staff, or that they were not doing the job as thoroughly.
As Patrick says, the Home Secretary cannot win on this. Perhaps she should be shot in front of her family (Tory joke).
So what are border officials actually doing? They are checking the passports of legitimate travellers, and at least 50% will be returning British citizens. Occasionally they will stop someone entering the country, or will place some restrictions on the time they can stay.
If the queues were shorter on the day of the strike, it can either be that the temporary staff were more efficient than the permanent staff, or that they were not doing the job as thoroughly.
As Patrick says, the Home Secretary cannot win on this. Perhaps she should be shot in front of her family (Tory joke).
Dec 2nd, 2011, 02:01 AM
#45
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 17,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"From reports there was 80% of the usual number of passengers but only 66% of the usual number of passport officers "
Is not the same pseudo-fact as "there were only 66% of the usual number of manhours worked"
Heathrow receives international passengers for about 18 hours a day. That means in practice three full shifts - when operated by union members with mealbreaks and scheduling determined by union agreements.
I suspect we'll never know for certain how the number of "open desk hours" that day compared with the norm because I strongly doubt anyone knows what the norm actually is. But it's highly unlikely volunteers worked as unintensively as the normal jobsworths.
Or what procedure was actually operated for arriving EU passport holders (there's not a scintilla of evidence the current overengineered palaver provides any more useful information or security than the old "Bangemann wave" did).
Or whether someone decided that Britain's economic interests were better served by allowing non-EU citizens virtually unquestioned access than by making thousands of ordinary decent tourists and banker-style plonkers wait 12 hours while every Australian twentysomething was interrogated on the offchance he might be a potential illegal bartender.
There are lots of reasons we'll never know. One of them is that no useful lesson can be learned about the efficiency of our border controls from the unique experience of one exceptional day. If we did resort to the Bangemann wave for EU arrivals, for example, it's 99.999% certain every single passport waved was genuine and innocent - but a permanent reversal to the system would guarantee EU-looking fakes on sale in every street market from Peshawar to Soweto within weeks.
Is not the same pseudo-fact as "there were only 66% of the usual number of manhours worked"
Heathrow receives international passengers for about 18 hours a day. That means in practice three full shifts - when operated by union members with mealbreaks and scheduling determined by union agreements.
I suspect we'll never know for certain how the number of "open desk hours" that day compared with the norm because I strongly doubt anyone knows what the norm actually is. But it's highly unlikely volunteers worked as unintensively as the normal jobsworths.
Or what procedure was actually operated for arriving EU passport holders (there's not a scintilla of evidence the current overengineered palaver provides any more useful information or security than the old "Bangemann wave" did).
Or whether someone decided that Britain's economic interests were better served by allowing non-EU citizens virtually unquestioned access than by making thousands of ordinary decent tourists and banker-style plonkers wait 12 hours while every Australian twentysomething was interrogated on the offchance he might be a potential illegal bartender.
There are lots of reasons we'll never know. One of them is that no useful lesson can be learned about the efficiency of our border controls from the unique experience of one exceptional day. If we did resort to the Bangemann wave for EU arrivals, for example, it's 99.999% certain every single passport waved was genuine and innocent - but a permanent reversal to the system would guarantee EU-looking fakes on sale in every street market from Peshawar to Soweto within weeks.
Dec 2nd, 2011, 02:56 AM
#46
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 20,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>there's not a scintilla of evidence the current overengineered palaver provides any more useful information or security than the old "Bangemann wave" did<<
That's the sort of awkward question I was anticipating: you know, the sort this government occasionally made noises about asking as part of its efficiency/cuts programme. But no doubt jobsworths' "Are you sure that's wise, Minister?" and Daily Mail headlines count for more, as usual.
That's the sort of awkward question I was anticipating: you know, the sort this government occasionally made noises about asking as part of its efficiency/cuts programme. But no doubt jobsworths' "Are you sure that's wise, Minister?" and Daily Mail headlines count for more, as usual.
Dec 2nd, 2011, 10:29 AM
#47
So what are border officials actually doing? They are checking the passports of legitimate travellers, and at least 50% will be returning British citizens. Occasionally they will stop someone entering the country, or will place some restrictions on the time they can stay.>>
that's the dilemma, isn't it? the vast majority of travellers, particularly from the EC, are going to be legitimate entrants, but unless there is an appearance of vigilance, the checks will provide no deterrent affect at all.
is what we do at present effective? f...knows.
that's the dilemma, isn't it? the vast majority of travellers, particularly from the EC, are going to be legitimate entrants, but unless there is an appearance of vigilance, the checks will provide no deterrent affect at all.
is what we do at present effective? f...knows.
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AlessandraZoe
Europe
13
Jun 2nd, 2019 02:16 AM
