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
-
valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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 -
Chizz said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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 -
ME14addick said: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.1
-
ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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?
Does it suggest facial recognition is being subverted in some way maybe?0 -
ShootersHillGuru said:Chizz said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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.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.1 -
swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.
2 -
ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.0 -
All that money and all those people employed help paying their mortgages and keeping the economy going.
Could build more homes for our visitors though I guess.2 -
ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.1 -
swordfish said:ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.1 - Sponsored links:
-
ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.1 -
Chippycafc said:All that money and all those people employed help paying their mortgages and keeping the economy going.
Could build more homes for our visitors though I guess.2 -
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].Citations:2 -
@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.5 -
PragueAddick said:@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.3 -
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!So it seems to be more about a common platform to automate more entry/exit checks than currently.I’m not clear how it helps mitigate illegal migration but perhaps that bit is being exaggerated / spun a little by the EU.0
-
ME14addick said:swordfish said:ME14addick said: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.
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.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.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/eu-entryexit-system#:~:text=You%20will%20be%20required%20to%20submit%20your%20fingerprints%20and%20have,you%20arrive%20at%20your%20destination.1 -
ME14addick said:ken from bexley said:ME14addick said:Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:Chippycafc said:ME14addick said: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.
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!
1 -
ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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?ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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?2 -
SporadicAddick said:PragueAddick said:@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.0 - Sponsored links:
-
I think the big big big picture is important here.Climate change will mean more movement of people and nations want to have more of a handle on who is visiting and for how long.USA does it, so does Oz, now EU and UK.
Orwell was only about 15-40 years out, depending on your personal view.Not to mention Rockwell 😀0 -
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, pathetic0 -
JamesSeed said: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, pathetic0 -
JamesSeed said: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, pathetic0 -
JamesSeed said: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, pathetic2 -
valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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?
Does it suggest facial recognition is being subverted in some way maybe?1 -
ShootersHillGuru said:Chizz said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said:valleynick66 said:ShootersHillGuru said: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 -
The same as your driving licence0
-
Stu_of_Kunming said:JamesSeed said: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, pathetic0 -
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?
1