UK economy suffers weakest period of GDP growth in five years
ONS figures show construction output slump as rate in first quarter slows to 0.1%

IAmAClaret wrote:£6. Cheaper than Turkey, Egypt and USA to name but a few.

But don't let that get in the way of yet another 'let's not do Brexit' argument.

starting_11 wrote:
We don't pay for US visas... But don't let that get in the way of whatever your argument is

starting_11 wrote:We don't pay for US visas... But don't let that get in the way of whatever your argument is

starting_11 wrote:We don't pay for US visas... But don't let that get in the way of whatever your argument is

Check you know what you're on about first.

Heaton's Gloves wrote:Bullys... pure and simple. We should respond in kind.

UpTheBeehole wrote:An ESTA costs $14

starting_11 wrote:An ESTA isn't a visa... Hint, it's in the name

starting_11 wrote:An ESTA isn't a visa... Hint, it's in the name

The MRV application fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. There will be no refund of the fee, regardless of whether the visa is ultimately issued or refused. There will also be no refund of the fee if you schedule an appointment, cancel and do not reschedule within 12 months.

The fee is valid for one visa application within twelve months of the date of payment. If you are unable to attend the interview you may reschedule an appointment for any time within that 12 month period. The fee is not valid for use by a third party

The MRV Fee Schedule is tiered as follows:

MRV Fee – $160:00;
Petition Based Applicants (H, L, O, P, Q, R) – $190:00;
E-1, E-2 & E-3 visa applicants – $205:00
The fee is paid at the time you schedule the interview. Payment is by debit card only.

It's the EU that wants a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland,

dsr wrote:It's the EU that wants a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland

JohnMcGreal wrote:First of all, it's the Republic of Ireland. Secondly, the EU don't want any of this. This mess is of the UK's own making.

JohnMcGreal wrote:First of all, it's the Republic of Ireland. Secondly, the EU don't want any of this. This mess is of the UK's own making.

starting_11 wrote:We don't pay for US visas... But don't let that get in the way of whatever your argument is

Rowls wrote:
Secondly the UK and the EU have both agreed they don't want a hard border. However, the EU are pushing to maintain a customs union on pain of penalty - one of which would be a hard border. The UK are trying to push for better solutions. So the EU, whilst admitting they don't want a hard border, are effectively pushing it towards a reality.
.

ClaretAndJew wrote:Forgive me for yet another thread regarding the ol' Brexit, but, wasn't this expected? Or is has this come out the blue?

The free movement through the EU was one of the biggest reasons I was disappointed with the result of the referendum.

Yes, it's a Daily Mail link, but the story within is factual.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rexit.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ClaretinMyBlood wrote:EU travel Visa charges will be minimal, price of a couple of pints.
Wouldn't be surprised to see tour operators factor it straight into holiday/flight costs.

nil_desperandum wrote:We've had this argument before, and no one has come with a solution to this.

Rowls wrote:Firstly, it's obviously which country he is talking about.

Rowls wrote:That's not true.

The UK has put forward several high-tech and novel solutions to the problem. The EU however, is disregarding these possibilities because it actively wants to force the UK to remain in a customs union. The Irish government is pushing this because it wants to protect its own exports and its citizens ability to traverse the border.

Although we don't want a hard border with Ireland neither do we want to be coerced, as a sovereign nation, into a customs union which undermines our sovereignty.

nil_desperandum wrote:Reverting to WTO rules = hard border, so it would be our government's choice not the EUs, unless of course you put forward the argument that the EU is forcing us to leave, - and furthermore - to leave with no deal.

Rowls wrote:That's not true.

The UK has put forward several high-tech and novel solutions to the problem. The EU however, is disregarding these possibilities because it actively wants to force the UK to remain in a customs union. The Irish government is pushing this because it wants to protect its own exports and its citizens ability to traverse the border.

Although we don't want a hard border with Ireland neither do we want to be coerced, as a sovereign nation, into a customs union which undermines our sovereignty.

Rowls wrote:That's not true.

The UK has put forward several high-tech and novel solutions to the problem. The EU however, is disregarding these possibilities because it actively wants to force the UK to remain in a customs union. The Irish government is pushing this because it wants to protect its own exports and its citizens ability to traverse the border.

Although we don't want a hard border with Ireland neither do we want to be coerced, as a sovereign nation, into a customs union which undermines our sovereignty.

Rowls wrote:That's not true.

The UK has put forward several high-tech and novel solutions to the problem. The EU however, is disregarding these possibilities because it actively wants to force the UK to remain in a customs union. The Irish government is pushing this because it wants to protect its own exports and its citizens ability to traverse the border.

Although we don't want a hard border with Ireland neither do we want to be coerced, as a sovereign nation, into a customs union which undermines our sovereignty.

Rowls wrote:Big failure of logic here. We are leaving the EU. That does not mean that the EU is forcing us to leave with no deal.
.

Rowls wrote:That's not true.

The UK has put forward several high-tech and novel solutions to the problem.

Socrates wrote:But that’s not the name of the country.

People could start referring to a poster on here as “that arsehole”. But I doubt you’d like it because the name is incorrect and disrespectful.

Spijed wrote:Tour operators generally don't factor visa costs into flights. They simply leave it to the tourists to sort it out for themselves. Too much administration involved otherwise they would have to pay the money to the relevant country.

All that will happen is that you'll either have to buy one online before you go or pay for one at the airport when you arrive, as you do now if you go to Turkey, for example.

KeighleyClaret wrote:You guys who voted leave voted to end the free movement of people within Europe. Shock, horror, the free movement of people within Europe is going to end!

ClaretinMyBlood wrote:Travelled to Cape Verde, Dominican & Cuba where this system has been operated by Tui & Thomas Cook, The price was included with the holiday & you simply filled your details out on a form provided by the tour operator & completed upon arrival in the destination country.

Makes it very easy for the traveller.

thatdberight wrote:Well done for confusing holiday travel and the right to work. I might offer you a job and tell you you're on holiday all the time so I don't have to pay you.

nil_desperandum wrote:If only it were so simple.
Just to give you a personal example. My wife has frequently worked in the EU over the past couple of decades. I have frequently travelled with her - a good excuse for a cheap holiday.
Would you suggest that in future we have different visa arrangements because one is a worker and one a holidaymaker? We just seem to be complicating matters. I can see huge amounts of red-tape and bureaucracy replacing commonsense and pragmatism. (None of it good for the economy, and all of it impacting more on the poor than the better-off).

thatdberight wrote:Yes, of course you should be treated differently. Your wife, assuming she's not an EU citizen, will need authority to work in the EU. You're simply replaying part of the stay/leave debate. If course it complicates matters. .

nil_desperandum wrote:So suppose when I said I was holidaying with her I was actually working for her?
Or suppose I went out for a month and worked for her for a fortnight and then travelled down to the South of France for a couple of weeks in the sun.
How could anyone prove when I was working and when I was at leisure?
As I said, it's not the simple matter that you make it out to be, and checking up on something and enforcing it would undoubtedly cost more than than it would save.
(As it happens she is an EU citizen, but my case was hypothetical).

thatdberight wrote:This "it's all too much bother, I can't be arsed" outlook? Would you apply it to everyone? Are you lobbying for anyone from anywhere to be able to work here without approval? People from, say, Serbia can't currently work in the UK at will. I don't dispute managing it and catching everyone who might break the law is not easy. But then, much law enforcement isn't easy; we don't usually just give up on it.