
Canadians may soon need a visa to enter the EU - kspaans
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/eu-visa-romania-bulgaria-trade-ceta-1.3526513
======
akhatri_aus
I'm not sure why the Romanian & Bulgarian issue is being mentioned.

Another part of it is Canadians and Americans have access to the EU where you
can just get there without forms or paying anything whereas you have to fill
in a silly form and pay a bit of cash to go the other way.

Semantically it's not termed a visa but it's just like one so this is the EU
trying to put in a silly form and small payment as a reciprocal measure.

~~~
klipt
You've clearly never applied for an American visa. Filling a "silly form and
paying a bit of cash" is way more convenient than having to make a consular
appointment, pay $$$ for that appointment, go there early in the morning on a
workday to avoid long lines, still wait an hour, get grilled by a consular
officer, pay more $$$ for your approved visa, and have to wait days for them
to mail your passport back.

~~~
akhatri_aus
Yes that's true, but this is also about Canada & the USs silly form on EU
citizens whereas there is nothing the other way.

Bulgaria, Romania & Poland have high overstay rates (above 2%) despite having
a high visa refusal rate. If they were part of the Visa Waiver Program it
would make them the worst offenders.

~~~
21
How does what your are saying (high overstay rates) go with the current fact
that thousands of people are crossing the Mexican border into the US and
apparently the US is ok with that?

I'm not against that, but I find it highly hypocritical for the US on one hand
to require visas from RO/BG people (and maybe others) on overstaying concerns,
while on another hand allowing free flow into US from the Mexican side.

~~~
akhatri_aus
It's a question of enforceability. If the requirement on Mexicans were tougher
they would use the porous borders more.

The weather can't be dictated by a piece of paper and a pen.

~~~
21
It seems the Obama administration could order with a piece of paper and a pen
the border guards to stop controlling border flow:

> The National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) and Pinal County Sheriff joined
> forces to denounce the Obama Administration and accused the White House of
> handcuffing the efforts of law enforcement in regards to the enforcement of
> immigration law.

> He reinforced the evidence that the Obama Administration has been bypassing
> Congress by taking illegal executive actions and forcing Border Patrol
> agents to not do their job of enforcing the law along the border.

------
fijal
I think bigger news here is for US citizens. US consistently denied visa-free
travel for a lot of EU countries, including poland

~~~
JustSomeNobody
comeuppance?

~~~
jerf
That's an egocentric view. The winds of the world are shifting and it isn't
all about the US. It has played its part in the drama, but it isn't even
remotely the only player or even necessarily the prime mover anymore.

~~~
adventured
I find that very interesting. What winds exactly do you think have changed
such that the US isn't the prime mover now? When I look around the world, I
don't see any reason to agree with your premise.

The US has an $18 trillion economy - 80% larger than China - with 43% of all
global wealth, the fifth highest GDP per capita, and dominates militarily
almost as much as it ever has (outside of the brief stretch from 1990-2003
when Russia was particularly weak).

I look at Latin America, Brazil is in a depression that is worsening (20 year
set-back at least), and Venezuela has collapsed. So there's no challenge there
from changing winds.

Most of Africa is getting better gradually, and that's tremendous news for
them, however that's no challenge to the US prime mover status.

Japan is in much worse shape relative to the US than it was 25 years ago. In
about six or seven years, the US will have double the GDP per capita of Japan,
as they continue to aggressively debase the Yen to try to remain solvent.

South Korea is no stronger relative to the US than they were in the mid 1990s.

There are no other challengers to the US outside of China in Asia. India is
rising, but they're no challenge to the dominant position the US has in the
world. Maybe in 30 years if everything goes really well, they'll challenge
China as an Asian power. Singapore has a great economy, but they're tiny.
Vietnam and several other Asian countries will likely keep improving, but
they're mostly a regional challenge for China, the US will benefit from them
improving (it will take industry away from China).

Half of Europe is either broken economically or otherwise very poor. I could
go down through each country and lay out their economic and political
problems, but it's not necessary. Most of Europe has lost ground relative to
the US on economy and military, that includes France, Spain, Italy, Britain.
Overall the US is stronger today economically and militarily compared to
Europe, than it was a decade ago. Where's the wind shift when it comes to
Europe vs the US? There has been none. The Eurozone for example is a disaster,
that hasn't seen economic growth in nearly a decade. Scandinavia is doing ok
(other than their vast household debt problems and Finland's depression), but
what else? And they're not a challenge to the US. Germany has been unable to
grow its economy almost at all since 2008 (the US has almost added an economy
the size of Germany in that time).

Russia is a non-issue as a challenger to the US. They're extremely weak now,
with oil on the way out permanently, which will cripple their fossil fuel
dependent economy for the next several decades at least. Their economy is
1/12th the size of the US economy now. Russia is now a regional player, a
thorn in the side of Western Europe, with a median income that has fallen
below much of Eastern Europe.

I go down the list, country by country, examining the situation, and the
relative strength of each compared to the US. What winds have changed?

~~~
jerf
Listing all the ways in which various bits of the world relates to the US is
entirely missing my point. All the bits of the world relate to each other
directly as well. Not all of those relations are the US's fault or
responsibility. Visa decisions are not being made around the world solely in
relation to the current state of the United States. In fact, despite
occasional rhetoric to the contrary, the US probably the least of concerns
relating to those decisions; nobody is facing immanent social changes caused
by incoming US immigration or fearing terrorist attacks from US citizens. (You
can and should debate whether the US government's foreign policy is good or
bad, but on the whole US citizens are individually well-behaved.) For example,
Shengen is not collapsing because the US is out there agitating for it to come
down. Oh, sure, trace the root causes and responsibility weaves in and out of
US actions, but it's a complex tapestry and, again, a bit egocentric to
specially privilege US actions in that rich tapestry.

~~~
adventured
I don't disagree with most of what you said. I consider the US to be merely
one of the many big influences in the world, and it's blatantly the dominant
one by a wide margin - by almost any metric we can name. However I fail to see
how the US has a weaker position in terms of its dominance / prime mover
status, than it did 10, 20, or 30 years ago. There has been no actual
fundamental shift.

For example, the US share of global GDP is unchanged over the last 30 years -
despite China's vast GDP gains over that time (meaning the US had to grow a
lot to keep its position, while other former major powers lost ground). China
has essentially taken the place of the USSR as a strength counter to the US.

Calling something egocentric isn't an actual counter-point (what does it have
to do with whether something is factually correct or not?), it's an argument
from intimidation. The only purpose it serves is to try to embarrass the other
side of the discussion (since many people consider ego to be shameful; I
obviously don't agree with that).

------
Grue3
Sounds reasonable. It's very difficult to get US or Canada visa in some
countries. Certainly harder than getting a EU visa.

~~~
osweiller
It would be an entirely spiteful act, however -- the only consequence would be
a reduction in tourist dollars to Europe. Which is why it seems incredibly
unlikely this would pass a EU general vote.

Canada and the United States have a refugee pact. Certain, specific countries
in the EU have been a source of large numbers of bogus refugee claimants that
cost considerable time and money (Canada received 23 times more "Hungarian
refugees" than the rest of the world combined in 2010). Hence, a visa
requirement. Spitefully saying "we'll do it too" is nonsensical -- Canada and
the United States are sovereign countries, so it's not going to be received
well.

EDIT: It seems that my account is dead. Yet another victim who dared to
disagree with the great tptacek.

~~~
dang
> _EDIT: It seems that my account is dead. Yet another victim who dared to
> disagree with the great tptacek_

Please don't post petty stuff like this.

Your account's fine, but it won't stay fine if you continue to break the HN
guidelines. That's no doubt why previous comments of yours were flagged (by
users, not moderators), and it has nothing to do with disagreeing with
someone.

------
alister
Since there's lots of discussion here about overstays, here's the US
government report for overstays broken down by country:

[https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/FY%2015...](https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/FY%2015%20DHS%20Entry%20and%20Exit%20Overstay%20Report.pdf)

Some highlights from the category of _FY 2015 Overstay rates for nonimmigrants
with B-1 /B-2 visas admitted to the United States for business or pleasure via
air and sea POEs for non-VWP Countries (excluding Canada and Mexico):_

Bulgaria 1.48%

Romania 1.81%

Average of all countries 1.60%

The highest rates are Bhutan 23.98% and Djibouti 26.80%.

One important factor that the report doesn't give is the difficulty of getting
the visa in first place. Some countries have a _much_ higher visa rejection
rate by American consulates than others. Those would be interesting statistics
to see.

I couldn't find a similar report for Canada, but I'd expect the proportions by
country to be similar, but perhaps higher overall for Canada since Canada is
slightly easier to enter than the US.

~~~
akhatri_aus
The correct column is the other one, 'Total overstay rate'.

Also those stats for the Romania and Bulgaria are _after_ refusing over 15% of
all Visas applied for, which is sort of a filter that prevents the number from
being dramatically higher. Under the VWP there would be no such filter.

The other country to mention is Poland.

~~~
alister
> The correct column is the other one, 'Total overstay rate'.

Yes, you're right. I used the column that indicates "overstayed the visa and
are still in the US as far as the DHS knows", whereas the Total Overstay is
sum of those still in the US plus those who departed.

Here are the correct figures since I can't modify my earlier comment:

Bulgaria 1.74%

Romania 2.06%

Poland 1.49% (since you mentioned it)

Average of all non-VWP countries 1.74%

The highest rates are Bhutan 24.89% and Djibouti 27.67%.

And for comparison: Average of all VWP countries 0.73%

The highest rates in VWP countries are Hungary 2.92% and Slovakia 2.36%.

> Also those stats for the Romania and Bulgaria are after refusing over 15% of
> all Visas applied for.

I'm interested to know where you got that figure? If anything, I would have
thought that US visa refusal rates would be even higher (varying by country of
course).

~~~
akhatri_aus
I got it from here:
[https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-
Im...](https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-Immigrant-
Statistics/RefusalRates/FY15.pdf)

Originally from here:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program#Adjusted_V...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program#Adjusted_Visa_Refusal_Rate)

~~~
alister
Even though it's on a US government website, I'm dubious about their numbers
and methods. That report (and earlier ones from 2006-2014) are riddled with
weird inconsistencies. Examples:

(1) Vatican has 100% refusal it says. The Pope and 557 people have Vatican
citizenship, and that's mostly cardinals and clergy. I doubt the US was
turning away 25% of them. The overstay report (linked in my earlier comment)
says that the Vatican (Holy See) had a 0% overstay rate. So the US was
refusing 25% of visas from a country with 0% overstay?

(2) Canada has 49% refusal it claims. But Canadians don't need to apply for
B-category visas to enter the US; they get an "implied" B1 or B2 at the
border. Canadians could get turned away at the US border and I'm sure some do,
but it's certainly not 49% of Canadians.

(3) The 2014 version of the report says that 100% of Serbia and Montenegro
were refused visas! That's not credible. It's completely at odds with the
overstay report that says that the US had 20,149 visitors from Serbia in 2015
and 17,422 in 2014, and 3,972 visitors from Montenegro in 2015 and 3,214 in
2014.

------
pj_mukh
I don't mind paying a nominal fee to enter the EU. Hopefully, this happens at
the border. Mailing in my passport to a black box EU embassy and waiting an
unspecified amount of time is what annoys me about visa processes.

I'm also not afraid of "Romanian and Bulgarian hordes" or whatever tired
immigrant trope was used to not open the borders to those two countries.

Work it out peeps!

~~~
cm2187
Visas usually involve having to queue at an embassy.

~~~
akhatri_aus
It'll likely be online just like the US/Canada eTA, so no queuing at the
border or at an Embassy.

It's only there because the US/Canada has it, not for any other reason other
than reciprocity.

------
chvid
EU needs to thread more careful here and solve this problem rather than accuse
Canada for arrogance.

If visa exemption is messed up with Canada (and even the US!) then Britain
voting for exiting the EU becomes considerably more likely.

After all Britain (and other Western European states) still sees itself as
closer tied to Canada, US, Australia than to Romania.

~~~
akhatri_aus
The UK isn't in Schengen so it's not part of this. They're not putting visas
up (or don't intend to) for Canadians or Americans. There's a bit of a
bromance going on for the anglophone countries.

~~~
raphman_
This has nothing to do with the Schengen treaty.

Schengen == "there are no passport controls at border crossings"

Visa Waiver Program == "you do not need to apply for a visa in the destination
country's embassy"

~~~
vidarh
Schengen also regulates a shared visa policy for all members and all countries
that are prospective members. This affects all EU countries other than the UK
and Ireland, and indirectly affects several non-EU countries. E.g. Norway
applies Schengen visa rules as a Schengen member, and non-Schengen countries
that are prospective EU members works towards harmonising their visa rules
with Schengen because it is a requirement of EU membership.

------
Kequc
Romania and Bulgaria both control their own borders, they are not members of
the Schengen Zone. Therefore this has absolutely nothing to do with an
exchange of visa free travel. A fair exchange would be that Romania and
Bulgaria both revoke visa free travel... although they don't offer it in the
first place.

It sounds like the EU is trying to throw its weight around in order to gain
political favour with neighbour states. I hope everyone says no. The EU would
see its tourism from more affluent countries plummet, cutting off the nose to
spite the face.

It's political posturing and probably nothing would come out of it if everyone
did say no.

~~~
21
What do you mean for Romania and Bulgaria to revoke visa free travel?

Romanian and Bulgarian citizens can travel all over EU, including into the
Schengen Zone, without a visa. They are only subject to a Passport/ID check.

And EU citizens can travel to Romania/Bulgaria without visas. So what do you
mean?

~~~
Kequc
I mean coming from Canada, both countries require a visa.

It's the same the other way around, but the EU is pressuring Canada apparently
to offer visa free travel to them both. Why wouldn't such a thing be worked
out between the individual countries involved.

~~~
germanier
Because the EU member states decided to lift this issue to the EU level via
Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001\. The EU is about harmonizing legislation
after all and regulating external borders is a very important part of what the
EU does.

~~~
Kequc
> regulating external borders is a very important part of what the EU does.

Whoa man. Lets not open up that can of worms here, lets try and keep the topic
about Canada eh/ I think telling another country who they must allow visa free
travel to is similar to telling them what laws they need to follow.

Canada isn't a member of the EU, there never was any such agreement. An EU
council regulation should have little to do with them.

~~~
germanier
Visa-free entry is usually done on a reciprocal basis, i.e. two countries
decide that each others citizens can enter visa free. The EU member states
decided that they only enter into such an agreement if there are similar
agreements with all other member states.

Nobody here tells Canada what to do. They only say that if Canadian citizens
should be let without a visa into the EU, they must allow all EU citizens
visa-free entry.

~~~
Kequc
I pointed out in my first post that the countries in questions have their own
borders.

The "EU" isn't an entity you reciprocate visa free travel from and to. Some
member states of the EU, don't share the same visa rules as other member
states. Such as in this case here. Why am I expected to talk in circles with
you.

~~~
germanier
This is the clearest I can put it: Parties A and B want to enter into an
agreement. B will only do so under condition X. Party B is free to state any
conditions they want just as A is free to not accept them.

Now substitute "Canada" for A, "Germany"/"France"/"Sweden"/... for B and
"Enter a similar agreement with these other 25 countries" for X and you get
the current situation. The EU member states decided to make this a condition
to all their reciprocal visa agreements.

If Canada thinks that's not fair they can withdraw from the reciprocal visa
agreements.

------
cm2187
Always amusing to see the US lecturing European countries on how they don't
welcome migrants well enough, and then see that these additional visa
requirement for "bad european countries" which population they do not see
coming on US soil...

------
puppetmaster3
Yes, and Turkey (80 million middle eastern people) will get EU membership.

Merkel cut a deal w/ Turkey to take back immigrants in return for EU
membership.

link: [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-
tu...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-turkey-
idUSKCN0SC08B20151019)

~~~
vidarh
As much as I'd personally be all for giving Turkey EU membership _eventually_
, with Turkey's current trajectory they are decades away from getting it, and
Erdogan seems intent on reducing their chances.

Even if Merkel tried to push for Turkish membership, it'd take years of
negotiations and further years of reforms before anything could happen.

EDIT: Note that what the article _actually_ says is that she has offered to
help accelerate the membership discussions. But even if Germany pushes to
ensure talks with Turkey are fast-tracked, the ultimate thing that prevents
Turkish EU membership is that Turkey needs to carry out extensive reforms -
both political and economical - as well as convincing several EU member states
not to veto membership before there's any way they will be allowed entry. Even
if the negotiations concluded tomorrow, it'd take years - probably a decade or
more - for Turkey to complete the required reforms (and that assumes the
government would even want to carry out these reforms, which Erdogan seems
totally uninterested in). I think it's more likely membership will take on the
order of 15-20 years.

