The obvious thing to be said about the pilot programme run amok that “loosened” border controls at a number of busy UK airports this summer is that said programme was both rational and reasonable. Obviously one is not supposed to say this and instead concentrate on the thousands of terrorists and other nasties who will have been “let in” to Britain as a result of the failure to “read” every “chip” embedded in every passport. Shockingly, officials were told that school parties and kids travelling with their parents probably wouldn’t need the same level of scrutiny as other, more probably malevolent, types.
A useful rule for modern politics: when the opposition (of whatever party) starts squawking about “security” being “compromised” you can usually reckon that you’re dealing with trumped-up hysteria. Mrs May has been undone by another iron law: never ever tell truths everyone knows are true but that you’re never supposed to admit to being true.
Still, since British terrorists and assorted other criminals and nasties can travel pretty freely in europe without their passports being checked it’s courteous to afford the same facilities to their counterparts from our european neighbours. Granted, extending this to folk from the rest of the world is an unusual step to take but I suspect the end result will be a great pile of heehaw. True, some unpleasant types might have entered the country and doubtless some folk who lack the legal wherewithal to loiter on this sodden turf will now be doing so. So be it. It is not as though existing “tough” measures prevent such types from entering the UK either. So the difference between a relaxed approach and the “tough” one is of degree not kind.
That does not mean all border controls can be scrapped, merely that we should place an appropriate value on their worth. As it is, they’re a symbol – perhaps a powerful one – that is almost as important as most of what, beyond inconveniencing people, they achieve.
In this case, hundreds of thousands of people who would have been allowed into Britain with no questions asked were allowed in a little more quickly than would have been the case had the Border Agency insisted upon more “rigorous” controls than they did. Big deal!
Open Borders is a losing cause, of course, and is for any number of operational, populist and political reasons. Still, it’s almost charming to think that for a few short weeks this summer the United Kingdom came close to opening our borders, albeit as a result of a certain degree of civil service blundering and, lo, it seems unlikely that the sky will fall as a consequence.
Given the security mania of our times this was obviously some brand of shameful failure rather than a happy something highlighting the ironies of preferred policy and all the rest of it. In a more reasonable time we might think a policy that didn’t waste time scanning children’s passports was not a bad idea at all. That would, obviously, require us to live in a different time. And a different country.
Comments