Posting from the Rebublic of Ireland now, as a tourist from the Schengen zone. UK requests a passport, but the Rebublic does not. So we flew in with ID cards only then drove into UK not having passports and this is explicitly allowed. Border crossing doesn't feel like border crossing at all. A small sign and a change of road sign is all. Suddenly the speed is signaled differently (mph vs. km/h). Even the driving culture is the same: speedy but careful and respectful.
In other words, this agreement seemed to have survived Brexit.
That's because inside the EU, travel to another EU country with just your EU ID is allowed. The fact that crossing from Republic of Ireland (part of EU) into the Northern Ireland (part of UK, no longer part of the EU) with just the ID is allowed is another curious paradox in this trying-to-fit-a-square-peg-into-a-round-hole of Brexit...
You're all over this comments thread trying to say black is white (let me guess, you're pro UK and pro Brexit?), but I refer you to my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35562072
I rephrase, technically I haven't needed to carry my driving license for the last several years of my driving career, but legally, I may be asked to present it at any time. I'd take the advice of the website cited above rather than believe you. I.e. you could be asked to prove that you're a UK/Irish citizen (easiest with ID or passport), and if you're a EU citizen entering the UK (the website even mentions crossing the Irish sea to enter Great Britain), you have to have a passport (although you might not be asked for it).
Before Brexit, the UK was part of the EU, and other EUians was allowed to enter it with just their ID card. So...
Only for a short period. The UK government are introducing an ESTA like system for non-Irish visitors from the EU, so legally if you're not an Irish citizen you should apply for this to cross the border.
I mean, I don't expect this to be enforced for most travellers but I suspect if you want to stay in NI then you'll probably need to show a visa (based on current UK law).
Pretty sure the UK has never done exit controls. I remember being surprised at being asked for my passport at the border post the first time I flew out of Schengen since officials don’t check your passport flying out of the UK.
I have travelled to the continent several times on the Eurostar and each time I got my passport checked twice in St Pancras Station in London, within a few metres of each other. Once by UK authorities and then by French authorities.
We're not debating statistical trends here, so blanket dismissals of "anecdotes" are themselves pretty useless. I was sharing my experience. Maybe you happened to be passing by while they were on their tea break, I don't know. I'm going again in a few weeks so will be interested to see if both booths are still functioning.
No, you don’t. Northern Ireland is part of the U.K. so it would be like asking for a passport to travel from Berwick to Eyemouth.
I’ve been on this ferry trip post-Brexit and the only thing the border police are interested in is whether a dissident planted a bomb under your car when you weren’t looking.
The language says "may" and "should". You have to be a citizen of Ireland or the UK, and they may ask you to prove that you are. And if you're neither, you have to have a passport, but the checks may happen, or (more likely) they won't happen.
So, do you need ID as grandparent poster said, or "you don't", as you claim? The answer is... it depends. Mostly it depends whether there are checks or not. Technically I could've driven the last several thousand miles of my driving "career" without my driver's license, but legally, I could've been stopped and been asked to present it.
You're reading an Irish website about "government in Ireland" to try and interpret UK law. Ireland is not a part of the UK or vice versa. In the UK, you do not need to present ID at any point to travel within the UK.
As per the Good Friday Agreement, this extends to the island of Ireland. In other words, you do not need to provide ID to travel between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. If you drive up the N1 / A1 dual carriageway (the main road between Dublin and Belfast), you'll see for yourself.
And on your driving license comment: in the UK, you do not need to carry your driving license with you at all. Traffic police are not going to stop you just to check you have one. Ever.
No, there simply won't. Your scenario makes no sense whatsoever.
How do you "only" check non-UK/Irish citizens? Do you listen for their accent? Do you go by skin colour? There will be no checks between Belfast/Stranraer just as there are no checks between Carlisle/Glasgow.
Are you still waffling your nonsense on this thread?
Let me be very clear: the government has balked at every single initiative that would violate the Good Friday Agreement, for good reason. They’re not about to suddenly change tack here.
If the Government starting checking ferries from Belfast to Stranraer, unionists would start burning ports just like they did in 2021. You can’t provide evidence for any of your guesses because it doesn’t exist. I don’t know why you waste your time trying to continue the “debate.”
> Are you still waffling your nonsense on this thread?
There is absolutely no need to get aggressive/annoyed.
If you don't want to engage, then leave the thread. It's not like there'll be a red bubble reminding you about it.
We're having a conversation about something that neither of us are certain about, thus there is no correct answer here.
> Let me be very clear: the government has balked at every single initiative that would violate the Good Friday Agreement, for good reason. They’re not about to suddenly change tack here.
Are we talking about the Irish government here? Cos I definitely remember the UK gov attempting to pass a whole bunch of stuff that would violate the GF/Belfast agreement since 2016. In fact, I believe that the Lords is the only reason they haven't.
> If the Government starting checking ferries from Belfast to Stranraer, unionists would start burning ports just like they did in 2021. You can’t provide evidence for any of your guesses because it doesn’t exist. I don’t know why you waste your time trying to continue the “debate.”
Perhaps, I personally wouldn't like to see it.
However, how does immigration control work if they don't? If an Albanian/Polish person can go to Dublin, cross the border and then head to the UK on a ferry and work illegally, then ultimately the UK government will have to do something. I have no special insight into what they'll do, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it involved passport/ID checking.
Lets remember that the UK government basically don't give a toss about NI, as evidenced by the last seven years post the Brexit vote.
> We're having a conversation about something that neither of us are certain about, thus there is no correct answer here.
I am certain. It. Will. Not. Happen.
How does immigration control work? It doesn’t. The Tories don’t give a fuck, never have and never will. And what does Albania have to do with anything? They’re not in the EU so they’d get stopped at the Irish border and sent back. That’s why they’re crossing the Channel; because it’s easier.
Why would a Polish person illegally come to the UK When they can just work legally anywhere in the EU?
Your arguments are full of holes because of what you said: you have no idea what you’re talking about. The best you can come up with is a bunch of stuff the Tories didn’t do.
This legislation wouldn’t even leave the Commons if they tried. Charles Walker and David Davis are only the most obvious names that would stop it.
And no, Labour have no interest in this issue whatsoever once they get into power. They have more important things to do.
The Common Travel Area pre-exists the Good Friday Agreement by a few decades.
The only changes Brexit brought about are Duty-Free shopping again, and I have recently - for the first time in 20 years commuting between RoI and UK - had my bag checked by Airport Customs in Ireland.
There was a very small risk that the CTA would be at risk due to Brexit so I know of some Irish people who obtained UK passports in case it did happen.
I visited both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland the other week, and it was exactly like this. I was worried at first about delays from going through customs, etc. on the trip between the two. But, I took a train from Dublin to Belfast, and it felt like nothing changed apart from the currency and signage. It was great to see such an open connection between the two countries!
Yeah, this was the major goal of the Irish government post Brexit, and they accomplished it. Unfortunately it's causing issues in NI, but it looks like they may get resolved in the next few months.
How so? Just the psychological difference in seeing higher numbers? I find the highways in the USA are much better quality. My biggest fear is running across some podunk town's overzealous law enforcement when everyone is doing 10+ miles over the limit in the USA and having Canadian plates. Or crazy road violence incident where they have a gun but I realize that isn't a rationale fear.
The good friday agreement is genius. It allows Unionists to pretend they live in the UK still, and nationalists to pretend they live in a United Ireland.
The Brits should be held to account here by all parties- EU, and other trading partners - Brexit should not harm the agreement they entered freely, and has provided peace for decades.
The UK was happy to honour the Good Friday agreement by not having border checks at its new land border with the EU, it was entirely the EU which had a problem with it.
Yeah, strange, that a party that wants all the benefits but also to be allowed to ignore the obligations of a customs union (like following the food safety regulations of that union) couldn't get its way... /s
This is a total lie. The EU would not allow a hard border on the island of Ireland, as it contravenes the GFA. The only options that were ever on the table were the U.K. being in a customs union or customs border between Britain and NI.
If the U.K. wants to diverge the its regulatory regime then there must be customs checks where they differ, otherwise smuggling will thrive. Case in point, HMRC did a spot check at Dover (where customs checks are not currently applied) and found most lorries had illegal produce in them.
I'm not sure how anything beyond your opening accusation is supposed to contradict what I've said. The party that was unable to reconcile its position with respect to the new border and the Good Friday agreement was the EU, not the UK.
> The UK was happy to honour the Good Friday agreement by not having border checks at its new land border with the EU, it was entirely the EU which had a problem with it.
This entire sentence is a lie. The UK wanted a "magic invisible border" on the island of Ireland. The EU explicitly wanted no border at all on the island of Ireland.
If you're not sure how that contradicts what you said, then I'm sorry that your English comprehension education failed you.
> If the U.K. wants to diverge the its regulatory regime then there must be customs checks where they differ, otherwise smuggling will thrive
Sounds like there are three options (I'm going to talk as if from the UK point of view):
- (1) Same customs laws + No custom checks = My sovereignty is getting violated because I can't change my laws without your permission
- (2) Different customs laws + Customs checks = We both have sovereignty and our regulations are enforced, but violent people who hate the border will attack it and kill people; that seems bad.
- (3) Different customs laws + No border = I make my own laws, and I choose to find violators at weigh stations, when pulling over people for traffic offenses, or by inspectors at the final destination (British equivalent of USDA?) I don't care enough about enforcement to check everyone, so I'm not going to make a physical border checkpoint. If you care so much about checking everyone, you're free to make a checkpoint on your own side. Your people will be the ones who do the dying when the violent border haters attack, but that's your problem. We both know border checkpoints here will cost lives, I don't think it's worth it, you do, I do what I think is right on my side, you do what you think is right on your side. That's what being different countries means, we can make different choices when different policy options involve trade-offs.
Only if you live in a fantasy world. The EU outright did not want this as a "solution" so they rejected it. The UK is actually doing something like this at this very moment. The result? We're currently allowing dangerous food into the country.
Your descriptions of options 1 and 2 are total nonsense from the moment you use the word "sovereignty." Nobody's sovereignty is violated by making an agreement, any more than your freedom is violated when you abide by the terms of a contract you freely agreed.
> We're currently allowing dangerous food into the country.
I would personally eat food that passes UK regulations (but not EU regulations), or EU regulations (but not UK regulations).
Are there reports of increased food poisoning attributed to Brexit? (I'm thinking along the lines of either an individual incident report saying "if only this meat had been inspected, it would have been pulled, and these people wouldn't have gotten sick," or a statistical study based on e.g. ER visits per capita for food poisoning symptoms.)
If there's no evidence of people actually getting sick, calling such food "dangerous" seems like fearmongering.
> I would personally eat food that passes UK regulations (but not EU regulations), or EU regulations (but not UK regulations).
The food has not passed either UK or EU standards checks. EU health and customs bodies do not check food destined for the UK market. And neither do the UK equivalents.
Is it, though? Are you ignoring the entire issue of now needing an economic border either between the Irelands, or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain?
Bitterness aside, the island being split in two makes no sense from an outsider.
Does Singapore make more sense? Papua New Guinea? Alaska, for that matter? All borders seem pretty arbitrary when you get down to it, but it's hardly alone in being a weird bit at the end of a bigger bit where one or other is part of a detached bit.
I don't know about Singapore or Papua New Guinea. We could get philosophical about Alaska, but the geo/demo-graphic situations are completely different from Ireland.
This is an island smaller than Ohio with five million people on it - people with a shared history going back many hundreds of years and seeming to not want to be separated.
Brexit threw a wrench in the idea of a seamless border between the Republic of Ireland and the UK. You either have a customs border between the islands of Ireland and GB, or you have a customs border between the Republic and the North. I don't see how it feasibly goes any other way, and neither of those make all parties happy.
> people with a shared history going back many hundreds of years and seeming to not want to be separated
Many people in Northern Ireland—a narrow majority at the moment—consider themselves to be British and do not want to be separated from the UK. That's why it's such a tricky problem.
This almost sounds like a parody of American meddling and ignorance, complete with the US state population comparison.
Not saying you don't have a point (I have no skin in the game) but I read thousands of similar western comments about various countries "smaller than $state!" and they're never helpful.
If it makes it any better, I wasn't trying to be helpful, I was trying to understand Ireland and someone else started whatabouting with other countries and states.
You see, people sometimes use familiar locations or factual references to draw comparisons to other items or places.
53 comments
[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] threadIn other words, this agreement seemed to have survived Brexit.
> Today, the Schengen Area encompasses most EU countries, except for Bulgaria, Cyprus, Ireland and Romania
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-...
I rephrase, technically I haven't needed to carry my driving license for the last several years of my driving career, but legally, I may be asked to present it at any time. I'd take the advice of the website cited above rather than believe you. I.e. you could be asked to prove that you're a UK/Irish citizen (easiest with ID or passport), and if you're a EU citizen entering the UK (the website even mentions crossing the Irish sea to enter Great Britain), you have to have a passport (although you might not be asked for it).
Before Brexit, the UK was part of the EU, and other EUians was allowed to enter it with just their ID card. So...
I mean, I don't expect this to be enforced for most travellers but I suspect if you want to stay in NI then you'll probably need to show a visa (based on current UK law).
The reverse has juxtaposed controls where you deal with both French exit controls and UK entry controls at the departure railway station.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juxtaposed_controls
Discussion-by-anecdote is pointless without dates etc, and a waste of time when it's easy enough to find the policy: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-pa...
I’ve been on this ferry trip post-Brexit and the only thing the border police are interested in is whether a dissident planted a bomb under your car when you weren’t looking.
The language says "may" and "should". You have to be a citizen of Ireland or the UK, and they may ask you to prove that you are. And if you're neither, you have to have a passport, but the checks may happen, or (more likely) they won't happen.
So, do you need ID as grandparent poster said, or "you don't", as you claim? The answer is... it depends. Mostly it depends whether there are checks or not. Technically I could've driven the last several thousand miles of my driving "career" without my driver's license, but legally, I could've been stopped and been asked to present it.
As per the Good Friday Agreement, this extends to the island of Ireland. In other words, you do not need to provide ID to travel between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. If you drive up the N1 / A1 dual carriageway (the main road between Dublin and Belfast), you'll see for yourself.
And on your driving license comment: in the UK, you do not need to carry your driving license with you at all. Traffic police are not going to stop you just to check you have one. Ever.
However, I suspect that this may change at some point, once the UK introduces their ESTA like scheme.
That's correct.
> However, I suspect that this may change at some point, once the UK introduces their ESTA like scheme.
No. It won't. That would violate the Good Friday Agreement.
How do you "only" check non-UK/Irish citizens? Do you listen for their accent? Do you go by skin colour? There will be no checks between Belfast/Stranraer just as there are no checks between Carlisle/Glasgow.
Here's an Irish Times article about the issue: https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2023/03/09/uk-amends-vis...
Looks like they've fixed the EU citizens living in Ireland crossing the border for work issue, thankfully.
The only evidence you’ve put forward contradicts what you say! You still haven’t answered a basic question:
How does Border Force check the passports of only non-UK or Irish citizens?
I have felt that way and been proven wrong so many times since 2016 that I'm hesitant to be certain of this.
I have no idea how they'll do it.
The most sensible thing to do would be to rely on the current approach (i.e. passport/visa checks by hotels/hostels/employers).
What I actually think will happen is zero enforcement till the Mail run a bunch of stories on it, and then everyone will get checked on the ferries.
Let me be very clear: the government has balked at every single initiative that would violate the Good Friday Agreement, for good reason. They’re not about to suddenly change tack here.
If the Government starting checking ferries from Belfast to Stranraer, unionists would start burning ports just like they did in 2021. You can’t provide evidence for any of your guesses because it doesn’t exist. I don’t know why you waste your time trying to continue the “debate.”
There is absolutely no need to get aggressive/annoyed.
If you don't want to engage, then leave the thread. It's not like there'll be a red bubble reminding you about it.
We're having a conversation about something that neither of us are certain about, thus there is no correct answer here.
> Let me be very clear: the government has balked at every single initiative that would violate the Good Friday Agreement, for good reason. They’re not about to suddenly change tack here.
Are we talking about the Irish government here? Cos I definitely remember the UK gov attempting to pass a whole bunch of stuff that would violate the GF/Belfast agreement since 2016. In fact, I believe that the Lords is the only reason they haven't.
> If the Government starting checking ferries from Belfast to Stranraer, unionists would start burning ports just like they did in 2021. You can’t provide evidence for any of your guesses because it doesn’t exist. I don’t know why you waste your time trying to continue the “debate.”
Perhaps, I personally wouldn't like to see it.
However, how does immigration control work if they don't? If an Albanian/Polish person can go to Dublin, cross the border and then head to the UK on a ferry and work illegally, then ultimately the UK government will have to do something. I have no special insight into what they'll do, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it involved passport/ID checking.
Lets remember that the UK government basically don't give a toss about NI, as evidenced by the last seven years post the Brexit vote.
I am certain. It. Will. Not. Happen.
How does immigration control work? It doesn’t. The Tories don’t give a fuck, never have and never will. And what does Albania have to do with anything? They’re not in the EU so they’d get stopped at the Irish border and sent back. That’s why they’re crossing the Channel; because it’s easier.
Why would a Polish person illegally come to the UK When they can just work legally anywhere in the EU?
Your arguments are full of holes because of what you said: you have no idea what you’re talking about. The best you can come up with is a bunch of stuff the Tories didn’t do.
This legislation wouldn’t even leave the Commons if they tried. Charles Walker and David Davis are only the most obvious names that would stop it.
And no, Labour have no interest in this issue whatsoever once they get into power. They have more important things to do.
The only changes Brexit brought about are Duty-Free shopping again, and I have recently - for the first time in 20 years commuting between RoI and UK - had my bag checked by Airport Customs in Ireland.
There was a very small risk that the CTA would be at risk due to Brexit so I know of some Irish people who obtained UK passports in case it did happen.
The scariest part in practice of crossing from the US to Canada, or vice-versa I presume.
The Brits should be held to account here by all parties- EU, and other trading partners - Brexit should not harm the agreement they entered freely, and has provided peace for decades.
If the U.K. wants to diverge the its regulatory regime then there must be customs checks where they differ, otherwise smuggling will thrive. Case in point, HMRC did a spot check at Dover (where customs checks are not currently applied) and found most lorries had illegal produce in them.
This entire sentence is a lie. The UK wanted a "magic invisible border" on the island of Ireland. The EU explicitly wanted no border at all on the island of Ireland.
If you're not sure how that contradicts what you said, then I'm sorry that your English comprehension education failed you.
Sounds like there are three options (I'm going to talk as if from the UK point of view):
- (1) Same customs laws + No custom checks = My sovereignty is getting violated because I can't change my laws without your permission
- (2) Different customs laws + Customs checks = We both have sovereignty and our regulations are enforced, but violent people who hate the border will attack it and kill people; that seems bad.
- (3) Different customs laws + No border = I make my own laws, and I choose to find violators at weigh stations, when pulling over people for traffic offenses, or by inspectors at the final destination (British equivalent of USDA?) I don't care enough about enforcement to check everyone, so I'm not going to make a physical border checkpoint. If you care so much about checking everyone, you're free to make a checkpoint on your own side. Your people will be the ones who do the dying when the violent border haters attack, but that's your problem. We both know border checkpoints here will cost lives, I don't think it's worth it, you do, I do what I think is right on my side, you do what you think is right on your side. That's what being different countries means, we can make different choices when different policy options involve trade-offs.
Option (3) seems pretty reasonable to me.
Only if you live in a fantasy world. The EU outright did not want this as a "solution" so they rejected it. The UK is actually doing something like this at this very moment. The result? We're currently allowing dangerous food into the country.
Your descriptions of options 1 and 2 are total nonsense from the moment you use the word "sovereignty." Nobody's sovereignty is violated by making an agreement, any more than your freedom is violated when you abide by the terms of a contract you freely agreed.
I would personally eat food that passes UK regulations (but not EU regulations), or EU regulations (but not UK regulations).
Are there reports of increased food poisoning attributed to Brexit? (I'm thinking along the lines of either an individual incident report saying "if only this meat had been inspected, it would have been pulled, and these people wouldn't have gotten sick," or a statistical study based on e.g. ER visits per capita for food poisoning symptoms.)
If there's no evidence of people actually getting sick, calling such food "dangerous" seems like fearmongering.
The food has not passed either UK or EU standards checks. EU health and customs bodies do not check food destined for the UK market. And neither do the UK equivalents.
Here is the newspaper report where the spot check was carried out: https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/uk-risks-food-safety...
So yes, there is evidence that the food is dangerous.
Bitterness aside, the island being split in two makes no sense from an outsider.
This is an island smaller than Ohio with five million people on it - people with a shared history going back many hundreds of years and seeming to not want to be separated.
Brexit threw a wrench in the idea of a seamless border between the Republic of Ireland and the UK. You either have a customs border between the islands of Ireland and GB, or you have a customs border between the Republic and the North. I don't see how it feasibly goes any other way, and neither of those make all parties happy.
Many people in Northern Ireland—a narrow majority at the moment—consider themselves to be British and do not want to be separated from the UK. That's why it's such a tricky problem.
Not saying you don't have a point (I have no skin in the game) but I read thousands of similar western comments about various countries "smaller than $state!" and they're never helpful.
You see, people sometimes use familiar locations or factual references to draw comparisons to other items or places.