Entering the UK- or going to happen now

nanna8: 'The systems are totally different, Believe what you like. No one cares which passport you travel on here we are not so silly. And we don’t make people who were born elsewhere claim citizenship that they don’t want before being allowed to come here. That’s it, can’t be bothered with this thread anymore, none so blinds as those that cannot see. Or like to just disagree for the sake of it.'.

Believe what you want Nanna8 but the travel advice is available on line for all to see and you are wrong-the systems are exactly the same! You have not taken the time to read Australia Travel Advice for Dual Nationals when this same system in reverse was clarified in an earlier post. The situation in reverse is not "totally different" as you claim.

Your OP: "I have an Australian passport and have not lived in the UK for over 50 years but I was born there. Apparently if I want to visit the uk for any reason I have to show a uk passport now. I don’t want one, costs too much and I am absolutely furious about this. I will never visit again , I feel that strongly. How dare they ? Maybe if I went in a little boat from Calais things would be easier ?"

Now imagine a person born in Australia, but living in UK for 50 years, is a dual citizen like yourself and has a UK passport. Here is the advice for that person: uk.embassy.gov.au "Travel Advice for Dual Nationals". :

'All Australians, including dual nationals, should leave and enter Australia on their Australian passport. If you have a passport from another country for example a British passport, you can use this for your return to the UK but you will need your Australian passport for travel to Australia...

International Airlines have the obligation to carry only appropriately documented passengers to Australia...

Appropriate documentation for a foreign national is a visa to enter Australia, Australian citizens do not qualify for a visa in a foreign passport for entry to Australia . If an Australia national attempts to board a flight to Australia without an Australian passport airlines will be likely to be unable to verify their claim to be Australian citizenship at the time of check in and refuse . See the department of Immigration and border Protection website for further information on citizenship and travel. boarding.

Thus the Australia/UK dual national, like yourself, must necessarily purchase an Australian passport if they choose to travel back and enter Australia. They need a UK passport for when they travel back to enter UK- which is exactly what you are complaining about in reverse- no difference at all. The only difference is that the UK charges you less for you to obtain a UK passport that Australia charges in reverse.

Engaging with someone who is acting for an audience rather than seeking genuine understanding can often be draining and futile, ending with them trotting out the "believe what you want" style of comment.

The point is that most of those on News and Politics aren't here to "believe what they want" but to understand the truth. As I've said before Nanna8, you seem to be on the wrong thread topic. You appear to be intent on making people agree with what is a personal opinion; belittling them if they dont. Most on here are discussing the law, the facts.

The systems are totally different. Believe what you like . No one cares which passport you travel on here we are not so silly. And we don’t make people who were born elsewhere claim citizenship that they don’t want before being allowed to come here. That’s it, can’t be bothered with this thread anymore, none so blinds as those that cannot see. Or like to just disagree for the sake of it.

I echo DAR, 13.07, Nanna8. Please don't insult my/our intelligence by repeating over and over that I/we find the issue and your comments "too hard for you to understand". We do understand your repeated comments and complaints.

You appear to have a big dislike of and disparage Britain/UK- "your lovely country"- so it's easy to understand why you do not wish to travel here ever again and enjoy living in Australia.

Not really sure why you keep moaning and complaining about the UK system that is exactly the same as the Australia system, save for UK costs cheaper.

nanna8

All I can say is what nasty judgemental people some are . OK whinge about us as adults but to expect young 18 year olds who have never set foot in the country to fork out hundreds of dollars each to visit is dreadful. Too hard for you to understand, obviously. Plus it takes months for your lovely country to respond to something that they dot even want . Plus they have to send original documentation to someone they neither know nor trust. That’s ok though British and Best.

I think people were just pointing out the practical side of the process rather than judging anyone. The costs and paperwork apply to everyone, so the comments were about how the system works rather than about the individuals involved.

You calls others “nasty” and “judgemental” then procede to judge and insult them (“Too hard for you to understand”). I really do think you are posting under the wrong subject, as what you seem to want is to be told your opinions are not unreasonable. Nothing less, it seems, will stop you attacking our country or GN members.

All I can say is what nasty judgemental people some are . OK whinge about us as adults but to expect young 18 year olds who have never set foot in the country to fork out hundreds of dollars each to visit is dreadful. Too hard for you to understand, obviously. Plus it takes months for your lovely country to respond to something that they dot even want . Plus they have to send original documentation to someone they neither know nor trust. That’s ok though British and Best.

Oh yes- Please disregard my typo “ oh dear and so it goes on” that was Allira’s post at 11.07 which quoted in my response at 11.51. My cut and paste tab mistakenly included - apologies.

LemonJam I'd appreciate you not adding in something when you quote me that I did not say, namely "Oh dear, so it goes on" If you care to check the post of mine you are putting in quotation marks (at 14:41:01 ) no such phrase ends it. I don't understand why you feel the need to include something I didn't type? What is the purpose?

LIKE DAR- discussion won't change the border arrangements and passport costs.

It's more the case that Nanna8, original poster, is furious about these arrangements, the associated costs, states "how dare they' and if she arrived to the UK in a small boat that might make things easier. Her thread probably fits better on the AIBU thread. You and Allira possibly would respond you do consider her not being unreasonable and that you agree it's unfair.

My response would be the situation is as it is as are the associated costs. You either decide not to travel or make the necessary arrangements- entirely your choice as an adult and moaning won't change anything. My response would be I do think you are being unreasonable believing that think you are being treated any differently than any other dual citizen in Australia, US, Canada, now UK and later this year EU. That the cost of a passport is not prohibitive in context that if you cab afford a return flight from the Australia to the UK you can afford to purchase a 10 year passport.

Rosie51 14.41. "Allira and I both understand the descent path. What neither of us thinks is fair is that there are large numbers of people, not just those born in Australia, that have this citizenship who weren't even aware of it until just recently. Why would you be aware if you have no interest in or desire for it? And that's what we've both said time and time again! The cost to them of visiting the UK is far more than their friends, who get to travel on their Australian citizen's passports and an ETA. How can it be fair for a country to require its 'own citizens' to pay more to visit than it charges foreign visitors? Obviously anyone who was going to make regular trips back and forth would likely find a British passport convenient, but for a one off trip? That other countries do the same doesn't make it right. Children born in another country to one foreign parent and one Uk parent shouldn't have to pay huge sums to either renounce their citizenship or to get a certificate that allows them to travel on their normal eg Australian passport.
If you find our objections to what we regard an unfair practice tedious you do not have to read those objections.Oh dear, so it goes on".

Nanna8 has confirmed that her GC are now aware of all border arrangements and that they hold dual citizenship. You have indeed it time and time again Rosie51 you think it's unfair that the UK has now adopted the same border arrangements for dual citizens as already in place in other countries, e.g Australia, Canada US and later this year EU. No one in this post has the power to change the arrangements no matter how many times you say it's unfair. Border rules are border rules.

Dual citizen Australian/UK grandchildren who previously "had no interest' as you describe now do have an interest- so thats a positive move forward. They now realise if they chose to travel across borders they must necessarily make themselves aware of border/passport arrangements, comply and pay the necessary costs. Such is life.

They may have "no desire" for UK citizenship as you describe but it was an automatic right bestowed on them at birth, at no financial cost, because one of their parents was born in the UK.No one on this post can change that- no matter how many times you keep telling us you think thats unfair. There are pros and cons for dual citizenship- that is a fact of life -families and individuals can weigh up and consider their options- fact of life. Presumably Nanna8's GC have always been aware that their mother was born in the UK and now they have been advised this resulted in them having dual A/UK citizenship. Quite simply- this is a fact of life and as a result of their birth circumstances. There are options for them to relinquish their UK citizenship if they so choose.

It is not the case that the UK , or Australia in reverse, require its their 'own citizens' to 'pay more to visit than it charges foreign visitors'. Having said that I hope you understand that Nanna8s grandchildren are not "foreign visitors" to the UK - as she has told us they are in fact UK citizens. Therefore just like all other UK citizens they must have a valid passport to enter the UK when traveling across borders.

"Foreign visitors" are required to not only have a valid passport to travel across borders but must also pay additional ETA charge as they are not UK citizens- which Nanna8's grandchildren do not have to pay. have All dual citizens need passports for BOTH of their citizen countries if they choose to travel across both borders, even for short visits. You keep telling us you feel that is not fair but its fact of life for countries that operate the ETA system at its borders. Or they can relinquish one of their citizenships and just pay for one passport. Facts, choices, options.

Such children have been aware since birth that they had 2 parents with 2 differing birth countries. If they had no previous interest and have only become aware recently that this poses dual nationality issues when travelling- there's little anyone can do about that. Now they do have an interest, have found out the travel requirements and as adults they can exercise choice.

The cost of visiting the UK is exactly the same for Nanna8s grandchildren as it is in reverse for their Australian friends who have dual citizenship, ie an Australian and a UK parent. Indeed as UK passport costs are less than Australia they have a cost advantage. Nanna8's grandchildren also pay exactly the same passport costs of Gransnetter's UK citizen grandchildren, save for courier costs. They are not being discriminated against or treated any differently.

The top and bottom of unfairness appears relate to the understanding that dual citizens living in Australian, UK, Canada, US and later this year EU, are required to have 2 UK passports IF they wish to travel across borders of country of residence and other dual national country of birth, or parents' birth OR relinquish one citizenship so only one passport is required. It is what it is no matter how many times you tell us you personally think that is unfair.

fancythat

Personally, selfishly, I would like the whole thread done again, with the 100% correct facts on it. So I can use it for future reference. For myself and others.
But that is not going to happen.

I don't think you are being unreasonable in your view of how it has played out.

This is an emotional argument wrapped up as a discussion. Such matters of opinion are best had on AIBU or chat. This purported to be about the law initially but it actually been a demand that we agree that "it's not fair". This way of thinking ignores the fact that:

• Citizenship by descent has existed for decades.
• The rules are public.
• Parental nationality is not a secret.
• Adults are capable of checking their own status and should be capable of doing this for young children or appointing someone in "loco parentis".

This set out as a muddled discussion - a small part news and politics, a small part attack on the UK, and a large part seeking validation for for being upset at not being prepared.

The law was explained, had the OP been reasonable in their setting out of their issue more sympathy may have been forth-coming. Not because what the government has done is outside the norm, but because the OP's family have did not seem to be aware of upcoming changes. We have probably all been frustrated by changes in law at some point but that does not make the law, the Government or the Country the villain.

DaisyAnneReturns

Their mother was born in the UK.

Under the British Nationality Act 1981, a child born outside the UK automatically becomes a British citizen by descent if:

One parent was a British citizen otherwise than by descent, and that parent was born in the UK. So if the mother was born in the UK, she is British “otherwise than by descent”. That means her daughters, though born in Australia, are automatically British citizens from birth.

The UK hasn’t “given” them citizenship recently. Legally, they have had it since birth. The complaint in the post is really about this: The girls were born in Australia.They identify as Australian. They travel on Australian passports. But because their mother was born in the UK, the UK automatically considers them British. That prevents them using the simple ETA route like their friends. So the frustration is not about visas; it’s about automatic citizenship being imposed, which then blocks the visitor route. That’s what the phrase: “the UK has deposited citizenship on them from afar” is trying (rather emotionally) to describe.

Is this unusual? No, this is standard practice internationally. Many countries (for example Ireland, Italy, Poland) automatically pass citizenship down by descent. The UK’s rules are actually more limited than some.

The key point is that he UK follows citizenship by parentage (jus sanguinis). Once you are a British citizen, you cannot choose to be treated as a foreign visitor unless you formally renounce citizenship.

The practical reality is that airlines and border systems increasingly match citizenship records. If someone is known to be British, an ETA application may be refused. So the issue is administrative inconvenience, not punishment.

I think this is probably right.

What doesnt work so neatly is the children of those children.
As I understand things.
But probably, this is not the thread to discuss that!

Personally, selfishly, I would like the whole thread done again, with the 100% correct facts on it. So I can use it for future reference. For myself and others.
But that is not going to happen.

Allira and I both understand the descent path. What neither of us thinks is fair is that there are large numbers of people, not just those born in Australia, that have this citizenship who weren't even aware of it until just recently. Why would you be aware if you have no interest in or desire for it? And that's what we've both said time and time again! The cost to them of visiting the UK is far more than their friends, who get to travel on their Australian citizen's passports and an ETA. How can it be fair for a country to require its 'own citizens' to pay more to visit than it charges foreign visitors? Obviously anyone who was going to make regular trips back and forth would likely find a British passport convenient, but for a one off trip? That other countries do the same doesn't make it right. Children born in another country to one foreign parent and one Uk parent shouldn't have to pay huge sums to either renounce their citizenship or to get a certificate that allows them to travel on their normal eg Australian passport.
If you find our objections to what we regard an unfair practice tedious you do not have to read those objections.

Their mother was born in the UK.

Under the British Nationality Act 1981, a child born outside the UK automatically becomes a British citizen by descent if:

One parent was a British citizen otherwise than by descent, and that parent was born in the UK. So if the mother was born in the UK, she is British “otherwise than by descent”. That means her daughters, though born in Australia, are automatically British citizens from birth.

The UK hasn’t “given” them citizenship recently. Legally, they have had it since birth. The complaint in the post is really about this: The girls were born in Australia.They identify as Australian. They travel on Australian passports. But because their mother was born in the UK, the UK automatically considers them British. That prevents them using the simple ETA route like their friends. So the frustration is not about visas; it’s about automatic citizenship being imposed, which then blocks the visitor route. That’s what the phrase: “the UK has deposited citizenship on them from afar” is trying (rather emotionally) to describe.

Is this unusual? No, this is standard practice internationally. Many countries (for example Ireland, Italy, Poland) automatically pass citizenship down by descent. The UK’s rules are actually more limited than some.

The key point is that he UK follows citizenship by parentage (jus sanguinis). Once you are a British citizen, you cannot choose to be treated as a foreign visitor unless you formally renounce citizenship.

The practical reality is that airlines and border systems increasingly match citizenship records. If someone is known to be British, an ETA application may be refused. So the issue is administrative inconvenience, not punishment.

It's no use, Rosie51

UK citizenship is a precious gift forced on many Australians born in Australia which they don't want, but costs them to renounce.

They should be grateful.

LemonJam People born in countries that use ETA systems simply enter their country of brith using their country of birth passport. Many have already patiently explained this. except nanna's GDs born in Australia of an Australian father can't use their Australian passports and an ETA like any of their friends could to enter the UK, because the UK has deposited citizenship on them from afar. Uk is not their country of birth. That's what the complaint is.

LemonJam

The new rules for dual UK/other nationality citizens have been made clear by many on this thread, links provided and detail also available on the government website.

It's not the case that an Australian passport plus Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) to travel to the UK is "not good enough" for dual UK/Australian citizens. It's the case that an a UK citizen is able to travel to the UK on a UK passport or a certificate of entitlement. If a dual citizen no longer wish to hold UK citizenship they can renounce it. There are necessary costs involved for ETAs, passports, certificates of entitlement and formally renouncing citizenship of course, as is the case in other countries for those who choose to travel. This new approach from 25 February in UK brings us in line with other countries including US, Canada and Australia and later this year with the EU.

The situation nanna8 describes is exactly the same in reverse for dual UK/Australian citizens who have settled in the UK for some years but wish to travel to Australia, their original country of birth. That is if they choose to travel from UK back to Australia they will need a valid Australian passport to travel to and enter Australia. They would need to purchase an Australian passport if they have allowed it to lapse as nanna8 has etc. Or they can choose to renounce their Australian citizenship and travel on their UK passport plus the Australian ETA. They will need to pay the necessary costs or choose not to travel in exactly the same way nanna8 has chosen.

The cost of a 10 year UK passport for UK dual citizens living and applying in Australia costs £108 plus courier fees for adults and £70 for children. Processing time is usually 3-4 weeks. The cost of an adult 10 year Australian passport for those living and applying in UK, which includes a mandatory overseas fee is AUD$611 plus courier fees, 75s and over 7AUD$392- 402 and under16s AUD$298- processing time Australian website advises is 6 weeks. Thus Australia is charging Australian dual nationals more than UK is charging UK dual nationals.

Clarity ... thank you. That should, of course, soothe the various troubled minds. Sadly, it won't.

"So you're saying that an Australian citizen who has not come back to the UK for 50 years cannot come here on their Australian passport." No one said this Allira.

Allira

Oh dear.
Why don't posters rtt.

Because so much of it is unsubstantiated personal opinion, perhaps? It does get a little tedious.

Said Granny.

Allira 11.18 "Oh dear, so it goes on. There is no way to explain this, is there, Rosie51. 🤯 Should I try the Janet and John method?

Granny B gives you a present when you are born. She thinks it's a precious gift but you didn't know you had it until you want to go to visit Granny. Granny B now wants to charge you for that precious gift you neither asked for nor want. In fact, you have to keep on paying regularly for it. To get rid of this precious gift you didn't ask for and don't want, you have to pay a lot of money. What a strange Granny she is".

It appears all on this thread can read and write Allira so not necessary for you use any "Janet and John method". Many if not the majority on this thread appear to understand the UK recent implementation of ETA and border entry arrangements that changed late February in the UK- in line with other countries and will also come on board for EU countries later in 2026. Many if not most now understand what that means for dual UK citizens now living abroad.

You and some others, including original poster may not like the new arrangements, feel they are unfair and do not like the associated costs but they are what they are if someone chooses to travel across borders. You inferr that other posters who do not agree with your POV somehow need you to implement a Janet and John method" to understand your point of view is somewhat pejorative. It's more likely they do understand but simply do not agree with your POV.

Lastly to help you understand, inline with your post, Granny B does NOT charge for UK citizenship for those born in UK in circumstances such as nanna8. It is a 'right' and there was no charge to nann8 at birth or since. At some stage she chose to apply for dual nationality in Australia, now her home. The UK does not impose any charges on her to retain her UK citizenship either. It is merely the case that if and when she ever chooses to visit the UK she must show a UK passport at the UK border as do all UK citizens.

Children born of dual nationality parents can and do weigh up the pros and cons of having dual nationality and take the necessary steps, plus pay any necessary costs, what citizenship they would like their children to have. Adult children of those who did not take such steps at birth, when travelling abroad always necessarily need to abide by border entry arrangements of their chosen travel destination.

Allira 11.18

No one born in a country requires a ETA to enter their country of birth as they already have the legal right to travel to and enter their birth country, subject to them showing their birth country passport at the border as they enter. Just as people born and living in the uK show their UK passport at the border and they return from travel and reenter the UK. Rules absolutely the same for UK citizens and UK dual citizens therefore no grounds of discrimination. They are not eligible to apply for an ETA in their country of birth as they already have the right to travel to their country of birth. People born in countries that use ETA systems simply enter their country of brith using their country of birth passport. Many have already patiently explained this.

All people across the world need to show a passport at the border to enter and depart countries Many have patiently already explained this. Many have also patiently explained that a passport is required for short and long stays.

The situation nanna8 describes is exactly the same in reverse for dual UK/Australian citizens who have settled in the UK for some years but wish to travel to Australia, their original country of birth.

If someone wishes to travel to either country for work or long periods of course it makes sense to renew passports for both countries.

But visiting for a week? Going over to visit family for a short holiday?

No. A visa or ETA should suffice.

I so admire your patience and attempts to get posters to actually read the thread and understand the problem as it exists, not the fantasy one they have created in their heads
😂 or 😥
Oh dear, so it goes on.

There is no way to explain this, is there, Rosie51. 🤯
Should I try the Janet and John method?

Granny B gives you a present when you are born. She thinks it's a precious gift but you didn't know you had it until you want to go to visit Granny.

Granny B now wants to charge you for that precious gift you neither asked for nor want. In fact, you have to keep on paying regularly for it.

To get rid of this precious gift you didn't ask for and don't want, you have to pay a lot of money.

What a strange Granny she is.