British passport holders to be allowed to use e-gates at more EU airports
British passport holders will be able to use e-gates at more European airports as part of a UK-EU deal, the Government has announced.
Since Brexit, British travellers arriving at EU airports have generally been forced to queue for manned desks to have their passports stamped, rather than use automated gates with facial recognition technology.
This has led to many passengers facing long queues, particularly during peak periods.
The issue has been described as one of the most visible impacts of the UK's withdrawal from the EU.
After the agreement with the EU, the Government said in a statement: 'British holidaymakers will be able to use more e-gates in Europe, ending the dreaded queues at border control.'
Julia Lo Bue-Said, chief executive of Advantage Travel Partnership, a network of independent travel agents, said the announcement was 'a significant breakthrough for British travellers'.
She told the PA news agency: 'The frustrating experience of lengthy border control queues upon arrival has been a persistent challenge for many, so the expanded access to e-gates across Europe comes as a tremendous relief.
'With this streamlined system in place, we anticipate both holidaymakers and business travellers will enjoy a much smoother, more efficient airport experience, allowing them to begin their journeys without unnecessary delays.'
Tim Alderslade, chief executive of trade body Airlines UK, said: 'This is excellent news for British holidaymakers and will enable an even smoother passenger experience for families travelling to the EU.'
British passports can currently be used at e-gates in the EU at a limited number of airports in Spain and Portugal.
The Government also announced that UK cats and dogs will be able to travel 'more easily' by 'eliminating the need for animal health certificates for every trip'.
This is through the introduction of so-called pet passports.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Popular restaurant forced to close today as 'emergency announcement' issued
HEREFORD'S Beefy Boys restaurant has had to close today (June 8) due to an issue in its kitchen. The Old Market burger joint said in an "emergency announcement" on social media that there had been an issue with its extraction system, and that it had been forced to close until tomorrow (June 9) for an engineer to fix it. The post explained that phone calls are being made to every customer who had booked in for today. Read more City burger joint described as 'orgasmic' by TikTok star Reviews reveal why cafe rated 'best in Herefordshire' is so loved I tried this new city cafe and this is what I thought It added: "We have tried our best to sort it but we cannot get it fixed. We have made the decision to shut for the rest of today. We apologise for any inconvenience." The Beefy Boys said "normal service should resume tomorrow". The Beefy Boys also has restaurants in Cheltenham, Shrewsbury and Bath, and recently announced that a new site in Oxford would be coming soon.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Billionaire takes on Heathrow with plan for cut-price expansion
A billionaire hotel entrepreneur is spearheading a rival proposal to expand Heathrow, as he vows to deliver the project more cheaply than the airport would. Surinder Arora is drawing up plans for the project after Mike Kane, the aviation minister, said last week that the Government was open to alternative bids to build a third runway. As one of the biggest landowners at Heathrow through his eponymous property empire, Mr Arora has teamed up with US engineering giant Bechtel to forge ahead with his development bid. 'The Government has asked for submissions this summer and we will be there,' he told The Telegraph. Mr Arora welcomed the comments from Mr Kane, who has confirmed that ministers had 'asked for Heathrow or a third party' to present alternative runway proposals. 'It's exactly what we've been asking for,' said Mr Arora, who previously led a rival expansion bid in 2018. 'We have said previously that we could do Heathrow between 32pc and 34pc cheaper,' he said. 'Obviously, times have moved on, but I think we will look to push on that. 'We can deliver the whole thing, and without a shadow of a doubt, we'd build it cheaper than Heathrow Airport Limited. 'This will give the airlines and passengers the chance to make a choice.' Mr Arora signalled that he has already enlisted hundreds of consultants to work on the project, which could include plans for a shorter third runway. However, he has vowed to listen to what airlines want before submitting his proposal. The possibility of a shorter airstrip at Heathrow has emerged as a potential alternative to the airport's more ambitious plans, which some claim could cost up to £ a runway could both slash costs and shave years off the project's completion date by removing the need to divert the M25, Britain's busiest motorway, under the new strip. Like Mr Arora, Heathrow is also working on a proposal. But this is expected to include plans for a full-length runway. While that blueprint is enshrined in an Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS) adopted by Parliament in 2018, estimated costs are understood to have swelled from £14bn at 2014 prices to between £42bn and £63bn. A truncated runway would impose limits on the planes able to use it, but would nevertheless find favour with airlines that have pushed back against paying for the pricier option. The boss of one major carrier, speaking at the IATA industry gathering in Delhi last week, said the latest costing for the full-scale plan would require what he called an 'eye-watering' increase in ticket prices of between £75 to £100. Sir Tim Clark, head of Emirates, the world's biggest long-haul airline, said at the same event that he was against diverting the M25 and would back a shorter runway 'for landing purposes or single-aisle aircraft, anything to declutter what's there'. Heathrow Reimagined, a campaign group that includes British Airways (BA) and Virgin Atlantic, said it 'welcomes competition and alternative proposals designed to increase capacity at the airport more efficiently'. BA, which operates about half of the flights at Heathrow, declined to specify its favoured option but said 'a solution should consider the airport boundaries, runway length, total project cost and the impact on consumers.' Willie Walsh, the former chief of parent group IAG, said in 2017 that spanning the motorway would add unnecessary cost and complexity. 'Airlines were never consulted on the runway length and they can operate perfectly well from a slightly shorter runway,' he said. According to stipulations in the ANPS, Heathrow's third runway should have a length of 'at least 3,500m' that would be able to handle 260,000 extra flights or more each year. However, a strip measuring 3.2km could accommodate 90pc of flights, according to the boss of a UK airline speaking at the same event in India, who described the prospect of diverting the M25 as 'scary'. Heathrow's northern runway stretches for 3.9km, making it the longest active landing airstrip in the UK, while the southern one measures almost 3.7km. Reports in March suggested that Heathrow itself was looking seriously at modifying its pending submission to the Government to feature a shorter runway in order to cut costs. However, Heathrow chief Thomas Woldbye denied that it was the case, saying that he intended to deliver the longer runway specified and that ripping up the busiest two-mile stretch of the M25 could not be avoided. What remains unclear is how much weight the Government will give to reducing delivery costs versus the extra time in planning that a radical alternative to the previous proposals might require. Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, said in January she wanted to see 'spades in the ground' on the project before the next general election and the start of flights by 2035. Departing from the requirements of the ANPS could mean that the planning process would be lengthier. The outcome of a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) review of Heathrow's mechanism for charging airlines in the context of the third runway will also be of fundamental importance. Heathrow Reimagined is pressing ministers to abandon rules under which money spent on the airport can be charged directly to airlines through increased fees. While those fees are regulated by the CAA, carriers say the system provides no incentive for Heathrow to wring efficiencies from infrastructure projects. In his comments, reported in the London Standard, Mr Kane declined to say if Heathrow shareholders, airlines or passengers should foot the bill. Meanwhile, a Labour insider said Mr Kane's comments were intended to convey a willingness to introduce competition into the runway process, rather than a pledge to do so. However, it appears the ball may already be rolling. 'Heathrow is a huge business, and competition is a good thing,' said Mr Arora. 'We're not here to slow or delay things. We will do whatever is necessary.' The Department for Transport said that while Heathrow Airport had previously been deemed the only credible party able to deliver the runway project in its entirety, it remains open-minded and will treat other proposals fairly. A spokesman said: 'There is no live planning application for Heathrow expansion at present, but when plans come forward, we will ensure any expansion is assessed against the Government's legal, carbon and environmental obligations.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
37 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Trump Threatens Musk with ‘Very Serious Consequences' if He Funds Democrats
Trump draws a line. The feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump seems to have gone from a full boil to a simmer over the weekend, but don't rule out the possibility of the heat getting turned up again. In a conversation with NBC News, Trump said he has no interest in making nice with Musk right now, but did make it clear that if the billionaire decides to switch parties and back Democratic candidates, 'he'll have to pay consequences for that.' Trump being Trump, he didn't explain what those potential retaliatory actions might be, just told NBC they will be 'very serious consequences.' Of course, it's not terribly hard to imagine the levers Trump might pull. He has already threatened to cancel the billions of dollars worth of government contracts that Musk's companies currently count on, and his close ally and former advisor, Steve Bannon, has encouraged Trump to investigate Musk as an 'illegal alien,' deport him, and seize control of his companies under the Defense Production Act. So, he's got some ideas to work with. Trump's threat of action against Musk certainly feels like a line drawn in the sand, but the President has otherwise not really escalated the beef since Musk threw the kitchen sink at him. In a series of now-deleted posts, Musk claimed that Trump appears in the Epstein files and has been withholding information in order to protect himself and supported the idea of impeaching the president whom he spent nearly $300 million trying to get into office. Musk took those posts down, but has continued to be critical of Trump. Trump rebuked the attacks in his conversation with NBC, calling the Epstein angle 'old news' and that he had 'nothing to do with' Epstein. 'That's called 'old news,' that's been old news, that has been talked about for years,' he said. Other than that, Trump has basically just decided to wash his hands of Musk—at least for the time being. When asked if his relationship with the CEO of SpaceX and Tesla is over, Trump told NBC, 'I would assume so, yeah.' He also reiterated that he has no intention of speaking with Musk directly and said, 'I'm too busy doing other things' and 'I have no intention of speaking to him.' That remains pretty mild for a guy who is certainly capable of being a bomb thrower, but Trump might have a sense that he will come off better by easing off after Musk flew off the handle. A YouGov poll found that among Republicans, 71% would take his side compared to just 6% who said they would throw their backing behind Musk. Even if you expand the survey sample to include Democrats and Independents, Trump comes out ahead with 28% of support compared to just 8% for Musk (though notably, 52% said 'Neither,' so the 'a pox on both your houses' demographic is strong). Politico reported Sunday that aides representing both sides have spoken, and there is something of a mutual truce at the moment to stop the bomb-throwing—though it noted that neither Musk nor Trump wanted to stop. Seems like they are locked in a battle of restraint at the moment, which is not exactly a skill either of them is known to possess. We'll see who breaks the truce first.
