Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
Above you said :
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected.
So if it’s not the main reason do we know why they are now proposed to be collected?
Mea culpa. They’re presumably making a database of fingerprints to assist with entry verification but the fingerprints are also a database of every non eu citizen entering the eu. It’s inconceivable to me that that database won’t be used should fingerprint evidence be found at the scene of a crime to supplement the criminal database. That’s all I meant. Just off to put on my sack cloth and ashes.
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
The biometric data (fingerrints, etc) will (apparently) only be stored for three years, after which, it will be destroyed.
I suppose anyone who objects to their fingerprints being on the database can register their dissatisfaction at the ballot box. If they have a vote.
But the ETIAS needs to be renewed every three years anyway until you reach 70. Presumably you need to re register your dabs on renewal ?
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
Above you said :
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected.
So if it’s not the main reason do we know why they are now proposed to be collected?
Mea culpa. They’re presumably making a database of fingerprints to assist with entry verification but the fingerprints are also a database of every non eu citizen entering the eu. It’s inconceivable to me that that database won’t be used should fingerprint evidence be found at the scene of a crime to supplement the criminal database. That’s all I meant. Just off to put on my sack cloth and ashes.
I still wonder what it tells us (if anything) about facial recognition (existing biometric data) if we now want fingerprints too?
Does it suggest facial recognition is being subverted in some way maybe?
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
The biometric data (fingerrints, etc) will (apparently) only be stored for three years, after which, it will be destroyed.
I suppose anyone who objects to their fingerprints being on the database can register their dissatisfaction at the ballot box. If they have a vote.
But the ETIAS needs to be renewed every three years anyway until you reach 70. Presumably you need to re register your dabs on renewal ?
Think we are mixing the 2 things here aren’t we and making assumptions possibly.
Fingerprints collected when you first enter - the ETIAS is separate (but linked) and renewed every 3 years for things like address/ contact details / occupation etc.
I’d (on reflection) be surprised if fingerprints are not kept after 3 years as they don’t change.
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
I gave context to my initial remark. Did you read it?
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
We’d need the infrastructure even if we were in the EU scheme though wouldn’t we?
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
I gave context to my initial remark. Did you read it?
I agree that are some extremely important things going on that people can't agree on, Climate Change being one, but that doesn't mean that other topics can't be discussed.
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
I gave context to my initial remark. Did you read it?
I agree that are some extremely important things going on that people can't agree on, Climate Change being one, but that doesn't mean that other topics can't be discussed.
No it doesn't, but I was using 'trivial' in a comparative sense and stand by it, not disputing your findings.👍
From Perplexity, my new AI friend (the best of its type because it always links the info sources)
The European Union is introducing the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) for several key reasons:
1. Enhanced security: ETIAS aims to strengthen Europe's internal security by conducting pre-travel screening of visa-exempt travelers to identify potential security risks[1][3]. This system will help prevent terrorism and other serious crimes[1].
2. Migration control: The system is designed to identify and mitigate irregular migration risks posed by visa-exempt visitors traveling to the Schengen area[3].
3. Public health protection: ETIAS will also help identify potential high epidemic risks posed by travelers[3].
4. Improved border management: The system will facilitate border crossings for the vast majority of travelers who do not pose risks, while allowing for more effective management of the EU's external borders[3].
5. Harmonized risk assessment: ETIAS will ensure a coordinated and standardized risk assessment of third-country nationals across all participating countries[3].
6. Advance verification: The system allows for advance verification of potential risks, reducing bureaucracy and delays for travelers at border crossing points[3].
7. Alignment with other countries: ETIAS is similar to systems already in place in countries like the United States (ESTA), Canada, and Australia, bringing the EU in line with these practices[1][4].
8. Information sharing: The system will enable better information sharing among EU member states and relevant EU agencies to combat cross-border crime and terrorism[5].
ETIAS is not a visa but rather a travel authorization for visa-exempt visitors. It will be required for nationals of over 60 countries who can currently travel to the Schengen area without a visa[6]. The system is expected to process about 1.4 billion applications[4] and is currently planned to be implemented by mid-2025[2][4].
@valleynick66 you are right that even if we had remained in the EU we would still have a problem because we refused to join the Schengen area (unlike Norway which is in Schengen even while not in the EU). That was our decision. Of course the EU see no special threat from travellers from the UK, the issue has always been the inbound threat which we perceive.
Had we stayed in the EU and used our influence and fund of respect and goodwill positively in Brussels, we would have made sure that all the richer countries pulled their weight in helping the Southern countries secure the EU borders, and none of this shit (including this thread) would have happened.
@valleynick66 you are right that even if we had remained in the EU we would still have a problem because we refused to join the Schengen area (unlike Norway which is in Schengen even while not in the EU). That was our decision. Of course the EU see no special threat from travellers from the UK, the issue has always been the inbound threat which we perceive.
Had we stayed in the EU and used our influence and fund of respect and goodwill positively in Brussels, we would have made sure that all the richer countries pulled their weight in helping the Southern countries secure the EU borders, and none of this shit (including this thread) would have happened.
This is what is referred to as nonsense on stilts.
On reflection and reading the government website it might simply be the fingerprint is to provide an alternate / contingency to a photo / facial recognition.
The website says subsequent journeys in Europe ie post initial registration, that a photo OR fingerprint will be taken. Given my failure to navigate eGates I can imagine a fingerprint might be needed sometimes!
It's when I read the dissention on something as trivial as this I get most depressed about the likelihood, or otherwise, of us as a race coming together to tackle the big issues of the day, of all human time really. COP29 started today, for what it's worth.
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.
Respectfully. I disagree.
In Kent alone, £35 million spent on Op Brock from 2020 to March 2024 and every time it is deployed it costs £250,000. It is normally deployed at each school.holiday, though thankfully it wasn't this last half term.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
No. Infrastructure only needed at ports and for Eurostar because checks done on our side rather than on arrival.
For flights it’s all done when we land in our various destinations.
I guess if we’re still in EU and fully participating then we would have needed this at all locations.
See attached for some details of costs / booths etc.
I love how excited people get about their lives becoming worse in the most miniscule of ways, just so they can say "I told you so"
Grown people, pathetic
The impact of Operation Brock & the impact on Maidstone, Ashford, Dover and surrounding areas of Kent has been enormous and very expensive for the tax payer.
Ask the long suffering people of Dover if the impact on their lives has been miniscule and you will get a very strong reply.
The main impact is due to the number of people who live in the South East. Take a lorry breaking down on the A2 or in the tunnel place grinds to a halt. That costs hundreds of thousands of pounds too.
Perhaps if we stopped flooding those areas with people that might help.
Operation Brock which has cost over £35million so far, has nothing to do with the number of people in the south east, it is to mitigate delays at Dover which have grown longer since we left the EU.
In your opinion. In mine there are too many people living in the south east. If there wasn't there would be no need to do this as everyone would filter through nicely.
It's not an opinion, it is fact. I have a stack of correspondence on Operation Brock, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the number of people living in the south east. It is a traffic management scheme to store HGVs in anticipation of delays at Dover port.
Exactly ME14 Addick, There MIGHT have been a reason to have the 'barrier' which required the M20 to be closed for two night, every time this process is put into place during the Pandemic, but there are no checks as the HGV's are waived through and rejoin the M20, but cause endless delays, accidents and time added to every journey when this so-called solution is rolled out, Generally in anticipation of what might happen by the 'Kent resolution forum', All this to hopefully protect Dover from a 'melt down'. However turning the M20 into a HGV park has the dire effects the local villages, and even Folkestone and Hythe as two examples experiencing a loss of trade and visitors, such as this Summer, Easter and previous Christmas's. The fact that besides August bank holiday the traffic especially HGV's could adequately cope on the motorway, argued my many residents, the reluctance, and some would argue incompetence of the KRF to put into place mitigation, such as several HGV truck stops, prior to Ashford with decent toilet/shower /food facilities for this crucial trade route has long been overdue. HMG will not pay for it, Kent claim they cannot afford it, perhaps they are waiting for the EU to pay for it?. According to Toby Howells, a man I do not have much confidence in, 'plans exist' .
Quite what these plans are, who knows. The last interview I heard at the end of October Mr Howells was blaming the EU, he may well be right, in the meantime I expect the roll out of "Project Brock" at Christmas etc etc. Until HMG invest in a scheme to sort out a solution, let alone the chaos that the fingerprint/ scanning scenario will bring, whenever it will occur,Meanwhile the private ferry companies and Eurostar rake in the cash, and the taxpayer picks up the tab. Don't expect a solution anytime soon, I am afraid.
In September 2023 I had a meeting with officers from National Highways and Toby Howells, along with local Parish Councillors. From that meeting and subsequent emails with Toby and other officers, Operation Brock appears to be here to stay, Toby Howells said that there is no alternative to Brock. The last Government had no intention of providing more money for an alternative and the new Government has other priorities. I am meeting with Helen Whateley and other Parish Councillors next month, but I doubt the situation will change, given the expected chaos when the new biometric checks are introduced.
Good on you ME14 Addick, I fear though that parish councillors are often used as 'advisorary' bodies and KCC councillors have more of an influence, although the 'management' is of course Highways England. MP's Green and Collins, although initially concerned about the M20, soon backed away, when the media turned it's focus on the chaos on Dover, the trouble was that diverting traffic on to the A20 when things went wrong, as they regularly do, with fires, breakdowns and accidents, the cost to the public is never taken into account. I noticed there are up to 12 police cars when operation Brock are on, 24 hours a day, for 8 weeks during the summer, but more importantly business's like entertainment such as musical events are suffering. The best music venue in Folkestone is closing after 25 years, The Chambers, quite a few of the pubs close early, even the fish and chip shop in Hythe closes at 8.30 on a Saturday.
God help you if you have a small business, however well established in Folkestone, the margins are small, and most cannot afford to even take on part time staff. Where does that appear on the spread sheet of Messer Howell's.I am sure the same goes for Dover, and people like me avoid Ashford. Sorry, I do not have an answer, but as you say yourself using the M20 as a HGV park is not the answer!, perhaps the likes of Howells and co need to think again, because Brock is not effective, and if they cannot deliver a solution for the long term they should step aside!
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
Above you said :
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected.
So if it’s not the main reason do we know why they are now proposed to be collected?
Mea culpa. They’re presumably making a database of fingerprints to assist with entry verification but the fingerprints are also a database of every non eu citizen entering the eu. It’s inconceivable to me that that database won’t be used should fingerprint evidence be found at the scene of a crime to supplement the criminal database. That’s all I meant. Just off to put on my sack cloth and ashes.
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
Above you said :
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected.
So if it’s not the main reason do we know why they are now proposed to be collected?
Mea culpa. They’re presumably making a database of fingerprints to assist with entry verification but the fingerprints are also a database of every non eu citizen entering the eu. It’s inconceivable to me that that database won’t be used should fingerprint evidence be found at the scene of a crime to supplement the criminal database. That’s all I meant. Just off to put on my sack cloth and ashes.
@valleynick66 you are right that even if we had remained in the EU we would still have a problem because we refused to join the Schengen area (unlike Norway which is in Schengen even while not in the EU). That was our decision. Of course the EU see no special threat from travellers from the UK, the issue has always been the inbound threat which we perceive.
Had we stayed in the EU and used our influence and fund of respect and goodwill positively in Brussels, we would have made sure that all the richer countries pulled their weight in helping the Southern countries secure the EU borders, and none of this shit (including this thread) would have happened.
This is what is referred to as nonsense on stilts.
Indeed like southern Italy did whilst we were In the EU.
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
Above you said :
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected.
So if it’s not the main reason do we know why they are now proposed to be collected?
Mea culpa. They’re presumably making a database of fingerprints to assist with entry verification but the fingerprints are also a database of every non eu citizen entering the eu. It’s inconceivable to me that that database won’t be used should fingerprint evidence be found at the scene of a crime to supplement the criminal database. That’s all I meant. Just off to put on my sack cloth and ashes.
I still wonder what it tells us (if anything) about facial recognition (existing biometric data) if we now want fingerprints too?
Does it suggest facial recognition is being subverted in some way maybe?
I'm not sure about subverted, but I think that in real world situations there might be too many facial variables for it to work perfectly every time. Anybody tried to open their phone only to get a message saying that their face doesn't fit? Mrs Stig got pulled over at City Airport yesterday because there was apparently a mismatch between her current appearance and that on her passport photo. She was cleared by an official in a couple of minutes, but I can see why the authorities might want an alternative measure.
Even if we were still in the EU wouldn’t we need to establish the infrastructure to collect fingerprints etc for those holding non EU passports?
To that extent ie a significant minority of travellers there would be additional steps which will impact airport / port procedures and efficiency at least initially.
There must be upside to the EU on collecting the data so maybe the pain is worth it. I guess they have not gone down this route without good reason.
I suspect also possible that had we stayed in the EU we may have implemented in a different way to some nations given we are an island nation and may still have wanted to have some additional checks / balances.
It is interesting that fingerprints will feature and facial recognition alone is no longer sufficient. Not sure what that tells us about the reliability of facial scanning or how it is circumvented by bad actors.
Fingerprints can be left at a crime scene. That’s why they’re being collected. Facial recognition relies on the individual having their face on view.
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.
I think it’s inconceivable that a fingerprint database on the scale it’s going to end up of foreign nationals won’t be able to be accessed by the security / police services. Seems unlikely to me at least. I’m sure we’ll be doing something very similar.
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.
But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin off
The biometric data (fingerrints, etc) will (apparently) only be stored for three years, after which, it will be destroyed.
I suppose anyone who objects to their fingerprints being on the database can register their dissatisfaction at the ballot box. If they have a vote.
But the ETIAS needs to be renewed every three years anyway until you reach 70. Presumably you need to re register your dabs on renewal ?
You will still need to renew your ETIAS status every three years (and whenever you renew your passport) after you get to 70. It's just that you will not incur a fee for doing so.
I love how excited people get about their lives becoming worse in the most miniscule of ways, just so they can say "I told you so"
Grown people, pathetic
Trust us, we’re not excited at all, just displeased/angry, mainly with the people who lied to us, rather than the people who believed them.
Oh there’s definitely a few that can’t wait to hit the copy and paste with their nonsense
What is the nonsense you're referring to? If you are going to make a statement like that, you need to put forward a counter argument and provide evidence.
I wouldn't read too much into the requirement to provide a fingerprint instead of/as well as a photo. I don't know but I think it's intended to be a form of initial two factor authentication and wouldn't expect is to be used in crime detection. Don't know why it's limited to 3 years but suspect that's the limit without it being linked to an offence maybe?
Comments
Does it suggest facial recognition is being subverted in some way maybe?
I’d (on reflection) be surprised if fingerprints are not kept after 3 years as they don’t change.
They are currently creating more land at Dover Port by infilling some of the harbour no doubt at great cost.
Millions of pounds spent at Dover, Eurotunnel and Eurostar adding the machines for the checks.
Presumably every airport, and all other ports in the UK will also need to have machines installed so the cost is far from trivial.
Could build more homes for our visitors though I guess.
The European Union is introducing the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) for several key reasons:
Had we stayed in the EU and used our influence and fund of respect and goodwill positively in Brussels, we would have made sure that all the richer countries pulled their weight in helping the Southern countries secure the EU borders, and none of this shit (including this thread) would have happened.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/eu-entryexit-system#:~:text=You%20will%20be%20required%20to%20submit%20your%20fingerprints%20and%20have,you%20arrive%20at%20your%20destination.
God help you if you have a small business, however well established in Folkestone, the margins are small, and most cannot afford to even take on part time staff. Where does that appear on the spread sheet of Messer Howell's.I am sure the same goes for Dover, and people like me avoid Ashford.
Sorry, I do not have an answer, but as you say yourself using the M20 as a HGV park is not the answer!, perhaps the likes of Howells and co need to think again, because Brock is not effective, and if they cannot deliver a solution for the long term they should step aside!
Orwell was only about 15-40 years out, depending on your personal view.