I'm not saying that EU bureaucracy is to blame for ETIAS; I'm saying it's to blame for any secrecy around standards, guidelines and discretion. Every country has its bureaucracy, though, including the UK. For example, the statutory guidance on disclosing police information on enhanced DBS checks still gives local forces a fair amount of discretion in what they decide to disclose. In the EU, the central bureaucracy's secrecy is far more wide-ranging, across so many countries, but there is still plenty of room for local bureaucrats to apply their own levels of secrecy.

In the case of individuals being banned from individual countries, it just means they can't normally be stopped at the border, but if they're found within that country then they could be in more serious trouble with the local law enforcement. It would probably affect their ability to get even a limited ETIAS after that. In the case of high-profile individuals, would they need to run that risk when they can do what they need to do by video-link?


=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

"only a year ago we'd all be pretty confident that a PPU notified trip whilst on the SOR there would have been no issues"

There was an issue pre Brexit, because every SO would be stopped and questioned, with the possibility of being refused entry, if the border guards felt like it. Once you have ETIAs approval, it should last for 3 years and should mean no more being stopped and questioned.

As for the idea that each country will have it's own rules, I don't see how that would work, because once you are in Schengen, there are no border checks, and nothing to prevent you moving around. Equally, a ban from one Schengen country, could mean a ban from all Schengen nations, which is why David Icke being banned from Holland stops him from going to any other Schengen state. However, the guidance says that an ETIAs could be issued, giving access to one Schengen country but not others and how that might work isn't yet clear.

https://etias.com/articles/how-national-units-process-etias-applications

I do like that people still think it's the EU "bureaucracy" to blame. Even the published standards suggest that each country retains the right to have their own rules. That they have tried to implement a standard set is a bonus. There has always been a right to reject individuals. David Icke is currently banned from traveling to The Netherlands, transition arrangements, EISTA notwithstanding. The UK has never been part of Schengen. We can't really complain if UK visitors' ability to travel to most of the EU is a mess. It's what we voted for.

I'm of the opinion that a barefaced lie to the EISTA questionnaire is very unlikely to result in a refusal at the border, but only a year ago we'd all be pretty confident that a PPU notified trip whilst on the SOR there would have been no issues and once off the SOR it would not even have been a consideration. This is just the EU enforcing their sovereignty, not bureaucracy.

I have to say I don't know what the criteria are, but then EU bureaucracy is secret even by the standards of most bureaucracies. Anyway, if someone has never notified travel to the Schengen Zone (or even the EU) while on the SOR (or maybe even just notifying their passport number), there is every chance that the EU don't know about them and failure to disclose wouldn't cause a problem. If they have notified while on the SOR, then if the conviction in question was in the fifteen years before the date of the application, it would probably be better to disclose, just to be on the safe side in terms of being seen to comply with the rules. Either way, once the fifteen years are up, the ETIAS rules say that disclosure is not required, so not disclosing would be complying with the ETIAS rules.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

I agree that the politics makes it unlikely, that the EU will want to connect their systems to ours and of course you could convert the data into a different format and send it that way, although it is a bit clunky and old fashioned. Nowadays everybody wants their data in 'real time'. They are too impatient to wait for an overnight batch run.

 "I believe the UK police are still sharing information with the Schengen system, but via Interpol" 

This is sort of correct, but of course the criteria for putting a notice on Interpol is very different to the criteria for the old Schengen alerts. The pre Brexit arrangement was to create an alert for every SO, regardless of risk. The Interpol system requires the police to justify their decision with a proper risk assessment. 

The unknown question, is what criteria will ETIAs apply to SO. If you answer yes to the question about convictions and you are not on the Interpol list, how will they determine whether or not to let you in? The existing literature suggests they will ask the UK for further info if that happens and that it is a manual process, not automated, so it could come down to an individual opinion of the Border force official who is involved.

Not going to give too much away, but when I was gainfully employed, one of my main specialities was getting "incompatible" databases/computer systems to talk to each other over secure connections. 

Most access to the PNC is not transactional. The PNC itself uses an overnight extract from the DVLA, not live data. This is "good enough".  Prior to Brexit there was a data link to the Schengen Information System. Connecting the PNC to ETIAS would not need a live data feed, but I suspect that it would be politically unacceptable for this to be allowed.

Hi

To connect the PNC to ETIAS directly would require both systems to be able 'talk' to one another and unless both systems were built by the same company, using the exact same technology, that can be almost impossible. The PNC is probably quite an old system now and not likely to be compatible with a brand new system such as ETIAs.

Never to doubt your good self but this is not correct.
having undertaken many "data migration" projects from old to new "systems" - and between organisations, this would be achievable; it all relies on the "data acquired" for the new dbase e.g. what data can it store and does the old data hold it and in the correct format; or can it be converted into the correct format. The type of equipment etc is in essence irrelevant. The dbase itself will at a minimum accept ascii which you know can and probably would be used. I've done it many times on old CCPM, Unix, DOS, Windows etc Op sys, between many different types of hardware and Dbase structures i.e. Oracle, Dataflex etc etc.

Before you correct me on this, I understand this may not be an instant access, but then again would that be allowed? However, a regular (nightly/weekly or ??) export from our dbase and import to theirs would; which with the correct data analysis and process would be achievable. 

In the end it is whether their is the Political will power to allow, pay for the project.

Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------

This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.

I can see the sense in that, but when it comes to dealing with the EU, I can't see that there would be the political will to allow them direct access to any of our systems. There are procedures in place for telling them what we think they need to know, and they can apply for information on named individuals. Now that we don't feed directly into the Schengen database, we aren't subject to their rules and procedures, and I'd say it could only reasonably be requested if we were negotiating freedom of movement, which we're not. They could only really try to impose it if we were trying to negotiate our way back into the Single Market, which we're not. Sure, they could decide they want UK police to update the Schengen database, but they're unlikely to offer that unilaterally. In terms of the linked article, I haven't read it but I can see from the link what it's about. I believe the UK police are still sharing information with the Schengen system, but via Interpol, as they do with many other countries without a direct connection. Whatever the means, I'm guessing that Canada wouldn't really be doing anything other countries including the UK aren't already doing, they would just be using a more direct method.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

When it comes to the practicality, the real problem is compatibility, not capacity. The new EU border system has capacity to log every single entry and exit for every EU country. Who came in, who went out, what date and what time. That's a huge amount of data, but its not unusual to see that nowadays.

It's a very different story when it comes to connecting different databases, located in different countries. To connect the PNC to ETIAS directly would require both systems to be able 'talk' to one another and unless both systems were built by the same company, using the exact same technology, that can be almost impossible. The PNC is probably quite an old system now and not likely to be compatible with a brand new system such as ETIAs.

But the EU could request that we share data with them if they want. Thats how Schengen used to work. It required giving British police the access, to update the Schengen database, which was held in the EU. The US has requested that Canada share data with them, see below. That could be done by giving Canadian police access to update a US database for example. It would not necessarily mean connecting the Canadian PNC to the US systems.

https://headtopics.com/ca/canada-will-accede-to-u-s-request-to-share-travel-information-on-convicted-child-predators-30812359

I am still not sure ETIAS will start anyway, or if it does it will be such a cockpup that they will have to suspend it, none of ther systems are ready properly.