Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ETIAS - EU Travel Document required for entry into EU from early 2025
Comments
-
You clearly don't understand how Brock works, it is a traffic management plan for storing HGVs, when Dover port becomes congested, and a very disruptive one for everyone living alongside and using the M20.Chippycafc said:
In my view it is...ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Huskaris said: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
Ask the long suffering people of Dover if the impact on their lives has been miniscule and you will get a very strong reply.
Perhaps if we stopped flooding those areas with people that might help.
https://nationalhighways.co.uk/travel-updates/operation-brock/
The link also mentions the Inland Border Facility at Ashford, another very expensive piece of infrastructure that has been built since we left the EU.0 -
Fine- but SHG merely wanted to know how it works in actuality. This does not need a history lesson.PragueAddick said:
Sorry mate, those are not great analogies. Here we are discussing a *change* to something that worked better before (although never as well as it should have done). Since the State has initiated the change it is in all our interests to understand why it has happened.stonemuse said:
This was the question. Nothing else. SHG wanted clarification on the process not the history!ShootersHillGuru said:Anyone got an inside track on this. I remember when you just got waved through. 🤦🏻♂️From the EU website :When filling out the application, you will be asked to provide the following information:
- Personal information including your name(s), surname, date and place of birth, nationality, home address, parents’ first names, email address and phone number;
- Travel document details;
- Details about your level of education and current occupation;
- Details about your intended travel and stay in any of the countries requiring ETIAS;
- Details about any criminal convictions, any past travels to war or conflict zones, and whether you have recently been subject of a decision requiring you to leave the territory of any country.
You will need to declare that the data you submit and the statements you make are correct. You will also need to confirm that you understand the entry conditions to the territories of the European countries requiring ETIAS and that you may be requested to provide the relevant supporting documents each time you cross the external border.
https://travel-europe.europa.eu/etias/what-you-need-apply_en
https://www.abta.com/tips-and-advice/planning-and-booking-a-holiday/upcoming-changes-travel-europe
But some just cannot resist.I can buy a ticket to a Charlton game or to the theatre without having to know the history of the Valley or the theatre company.I can pay for a visa to Indonesia without having to know why it is required.But apparently that changes with EU travel 🤣A better CL analogy would be the issue of our squad and its apparent failures. Should we just shout and scream about the players we dont like, and the owners who “don’t put their hands in their pockets”? We are better than that, are we not, because we try to tackle the underlying issues and find out how our playing budget stacks up, how much our owners have put in, how we recruit, and who takes the decisions.
Won't waste any more time and will let others argue.4 -
I voted remainjimmymelrose said:
The result of the vote in reality is what you are getting.seth plum said:
Why personalise and say snide stuff about straws nurses and medication?Bailey said:Seth, I should point out that from my own experience, most people outside of Northern Ireland didn't take into consideration the 'Northern Ireland protocol', it certainly wasn't on the ballot paper and probably backs up my point that people generally vote from a personal standpoint without deep consideration as to the ramifications of their standpoint and eventual voting intention. Then again, if you believe that Brexit has failed or at least not achieved it's supposed benefits to the country because Northern Ireland is being treated differently, then would you kindly put down those straws you've been clutching and wait for Nursey to bring round your meds.
If what I have written is wrong then say why.
Your opinion is that people didn’t consider the ramification of their vote.
I am not interested in why people voted the way they did, but the result of the vote in reality.
You should instead be interested in why people voted the why they did because then you might understand something of the reality.
The reality is that the media and politicians don’t now, and during the pre-Brexit vote didn’t, tell you the truth.
The truth is out there but you have to research it. Sadly, most people go by the media’s lies, and even worse social media.
It seems to me that you, Seth, like many many people, voted based on lies and nonsense promises, which is why now you all say the equally nonsensical ’this isn’t the Brexit I voted for.’
As Thereas May said ’Leave means Leave’ but the problem is that many many 'Leavers’ didn’t know what Leave meant because of the lack of true explanation before the vote. Many ’remainers’ tried to point it out but were shouted down, or worse, not given air time.3 -
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' .ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Huskaris said: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
Ask the long suffering people of Dover if the impact on their lives has been miniscule and you will get a very strong reply.
Perhaps if we stopped flooding those areas with people that might help.
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.
1 -
I reference Northern Ireland because it is part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland which is what the vote to leave was about.Bailey said:
It was a joke Seth, not meant to personalise or abuse you, just pointing out that the NI protocol has nothing to with the failure or success of Brexit, you seemed to be suggesting it did, which is a wild assumption, if that is what you are suggesting. I apologise unreservedly. My point of view is its failure is because we are a net importer of goods and placed tarriffs on 60% of those goods. We have an ageing workforce thar couldn't take up the gap that the loss of European workers, people were told lies about their individual industries benefiting from Brexit, fisheries and farmers spring to mind and lastly but not least the European Research Group, a minority group who gained traction in the Conservative party for no reason that I can find, have no answers to how to benefit from Brexit or how to cure the problems.seth plum said:
Why personalise and say snide stuff about straws nurses and medication?Bailey said:Seth, I should point out that from my own experience, most people outside of Northern Ireland didn't take into consideration the 'Northern Ireland protocol', it certainly wasn't on the ballot paper and probably backs up my point that people generally vote from a personal standpoint without deep consideration as to the ramifications of their standpoint and eventual voting intention. Then again, if you believe that Brexit has failed or at least not achieved it's supposed benefits to the country because Northern Ireland is being treated differently, then would you kindly put down those straws you've been clutching and wait for Nursey to bring round your meds.
If what I have written is wrong then say why.
Your opinion is that people didn’t consider the ramification of their vote.
I am not interested in why people voted the way they did, but the result of the vote in reality.0 -
That’s a pintPrincessFiona said:
A whole 7 Euros for 3 years - if it ever happens!ShootersHillGuru said:
And pay for what was freesoapy_jones said:Awe, you're all gonna have to fill a form in.0 -
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.ken from bexley said:
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' .ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Huskaris said: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
Ask the long suffering people of Dover if the impact on their lives has been miniscule and you will get a very strong reply.
Perhaps if we stopped flooding those areas with people that might help.
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.
1 -
I know exactly why it’s happened, it’s just that I didn’t want the thread closed down. My views on Brexit are well known I think and I think I know what most other posters are too. This is about the new documentation and what people know or don’t about that.JamesSeed said:
When something is implemented that makes your life even slightly worse, it’s always good to know why it happened isn’t it?ShootersHillGuru said:
Well that’s fairly pertinent to a discussion on new documentation and fees where none existed before. It doesn’t need to focus on the whys or wherefores. That’s now history. What I wanted to find out from my original post was how it’s going to impact travellers not why.MrOneLung said:
Must have forgotten when you typed : I remember when you were just waived thru 🤦♂️ShootersHillGuru said:Was hoping this wouldn’t deteriorate into a Brexit thing. If it does, it’s a pity. I was hoping that that it would lead to how this was going to be implemented and what it means for the average traveller.2 -
It's a good reason why it shouldn't be closed down as there is a clearly lack of knowledge of what is to come and the reasons why.ShootersHillGuru said:
I know exactly why it’s happened, it’s just that I didn’t want the thread closed down. My views on Brexit are well known I think and I think I know what most other posters are too. This is about the new documentation and what people know or don’t about that.JamesSeed said:
When something is implemented that makes your life even slightly worse, it’s always good to know why it happened isn’t it?ShootersHillGuru said:
Well that’s fairly pertinent to a discussion on new documentation and fees where none existed before. It doesn’t need to focus on the whys or wherefores. That’s now history. What I wanted to find out from my original post was how it’s going to impact travellers not why.MrOneLung said:
Must have forgotten when you typed : I remember when you were just waived thru 🤦♂️ShootersHillGuru said:Was hoping this wouldn’t deteriorate into a Brexit thing. If it does, it’s a pity. I was hoping that that it would lead to how this was going to be implemented and what it means for the average traveller.4 -
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.2 - Sponsored links:
-
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.valleynick66 said: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.0 -
Citizens of third countries can stay in the EU for 90 days in any 180 I believe, so recording when they enter and leave is necessary.
The problem for ports like Dover is the lack of space for vehicles to wait to be processed. If we were stil in the EU, there would be no need for the checks and passengers could just show their passports as they did prior to leaving the EU. Non EU passengers travelling from the UK through Dover to Europe, would be few in number, so not so much of a problem with queueing.0 -
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.0 -
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.valleynick66 said:
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.0 -
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said:
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.0 -
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin offvalleynick66 said:
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said:
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.0 -
The biometric data (fingerrints, etc) will (apparently) only be stored for three years, after which, it will be destroyed.ShootersHillGuru said:
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin offvalleynick66 said:
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said:
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
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.0 -
Above you said :ShootersHillGuru said:
Not sure it’s primary but certainly a spin offvalleynick66 said:
Sharing data I agree is inevitable and a good thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said:
So you think the driver is in case visitors commit crimes?ShootersHillGuru said:
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.valleynick66 said: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.
I hadn’t imagined that was the prime reason. But genuinely unsure what has pushed the EU down this route.But you seem to suggest that’s the primary driver. I just hadn’t considered that.
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?1 -
Will this €7 charge allow us to get back in to the quick lane again?0
-
Erm, I think it's more to do with geography.Chippycafc said:
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. And its getting worse on a daily basis,ME14addick said:
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.Chippycafc said:
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.ME14addick said:
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.Huskaris said: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
Ask the long suffering people of Dover if the impact on their lives has been miniscule and you will get a very strong reply.
Perhaps if we stopped flooding those areas with people that might help.
The route with the shortest sea crossing/tunnel will always be the busiest route.
The number of residents in the South East is less important than the infrastructure in place/willingness to create additional infrastructure to allow for greater ease of transit.
Dover and the channel crossings are a bottleneck at the best of times, anything that slows down the flow of traffic (weather or politics) just magnifies it.3 - Sponsored links:
-
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.
0 -
As slow and frustrating as the queues now can be it still seems to me that the luggage is still not on the baggage carousel whether I’m first or last in line at passport control 😀Friend Or Defoe said:Will this €7 charge allow us to get back in to the quick lane again?0 -
Only this year...ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s a pintPrincessFiona said:
A whole 7 Euros for 3 years - if it ever happens!ShootersHillGuru said:
And pay for what was freesoapy_jones said:Awe, you're all gonna have to fill a form in.0 -
Just to be clear, the EES is something that we, the UK, were fully on board with, indeed one of the main protagonists of, when we were in the EU. It's essentially about visitors overstaying their, um, welcome and less about security, etc. beyond having real time, easily accessible data about who's in the country.
Making that decision about who to let in is partially covered off in the ETIAS scheme. Linked things, but for different purposes.
The UK insisted on being outside the EES scheme as part of the withdrawal agreement and I believe since, Ireland decided it wasn't for them so have opted out of the EES.2 -
Still can’t get my head around UK nationals with homes in Spain that voted for Brexit10
-
Not sure I follow how it will therefore always help identify those that outstay their visa / agreed time in country if it’s correct that fingerprints are not kept beyond 3 years?Bournemouth Addick said:Just to be clear, the EES is something that we, the UK, were fully on board with, indeed one of the main protagonists of, when we were in the EU. It's essentially about visitors overstaying their, um, welcome and less about security, etc. beyond having real time, easily accessible data about who's in the country.
Making that decision about who to let in is partially covered off in the ETIAS scheme. Linked things, but for different purposes.
The UK insisted on being outside the EES scheme as part of the withdrawal agreement and I believe since, Ireland decided it wasn't for them so have opted out of the EES.
Wouldnt that mean a person seeking to dodge the system / claim to be someone other than as per their passport at 1st entry only needs to be undetected for 3 years?
Real time information
about who is in the country is gathered already I assume when you present a passport? Seems to me most countries scan my passport snd take a picture when I go on holiday and not just look at it- but maybe that’s just my perception.Am I missing something?0 -
Won't help find Lucan. Fed to the tiger? 🐅 Food for thought. Is there a Lord Lucan thread to revive anywhere? So many questions arising after that BBC doc 🤔0
-
https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/71414/lord-lucan-ripswordfish said:Won't help find Lucan. Fed to the tiger? 🐅 Food for thought. Is there a Lord Lucan thread to revive anywhere? So many questions arising after that BBC doc 🤔2 -
Thank you. I'd better read it first 😉clive said:
https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/71414/lord-lucan-ripswordfish said:Won't help find Lucan. Fed to the tiger? 🐅 Food for thought. Is there a Lord Lucan thread to revive anywhere? So many questions arising after that BBC doc 🤔0 -
It isn't trivial as so much money has been spent in preparing for the extra checks.swordfish said: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.0
