British travellers to face fingerprint scans on every trip to EU
British citizens will be required to have their fingerprints scanned whenever they go to the European Union due to delays in the development of digital biometrics software.
Every UK passenger entering the Schengen area will need to exit their car to be photographed and fingerprinted individually. A spokesperson for the Port of Dover, which facilitates transit and trade with countries like France and the Netherlands, told The Independent the plans will be rolled out in the autumn.
This is because a new biometric entry-check system for non-EU citizens was expected to be implemented last year, but this has been postponed.
The Independent initially reported on the delay to the new system at the end of 2024, with suggestions that the demand for fingerprints may quietly be dropped.
Doug Bannister, the port's chief executive, told The Guardian it will be 'business as usual' this summer but said 'a big change' in travel will be phased in from November.
An individual's fingerprint or a picture of their face will be checked alongside their passport number on every trip. The technology is being utilised to eliminate "wet stamping" of passports and enable an automated recording of the duration of visitors' stays in mainland Europe.
In time, an app installed on UK Border Force tablets is intended to be passed into the car to verify each person's fingerprints.
However, Mr Bannister said the app, which has been developed by the EU's border agency Frontex, 'won't be ready any time before November, but hopefully it could come swiftly after that'. Frontex said it was up to each member state to implement its use.
Mr Bannister admitted 'second, third, fourth time travellers still need to have a biometric captured at the border'. This means that passengers will still be required to step out of their vehicles every time until the app is ready.
There will be significant infrastructure improvements in Kent in an effort to reduce disruptions to cross-border transport.
To accommodate passengers getting off cars and buses, the Port of Dover is reclaiming 13 hectares of land.
In a solution supported by the UK and French governments, the port said it will create a virtual system around 1.5 miles across the port's surrounding area for checks.
Mr Bannister is certain that the upcoming inspections at the port, which handles up to 10,000 trucks and 15,000 passenger cars every day during the summer, will require only an extra six minutes to each trip.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Charity warns of disposable vapes ‘ticking time bomb' following ban
A 'ticking time bomb' of disposable vapes is set to enter the waste system this week, risking widespread fires because of the incorrect disposal of the devices' batteries, a charity has warned. Electrical Safety First urged vapers not to 'bin the battery' following the ban on the sale of disposable or single-use vapes from June 1. A survey for the charity found almost three in five vapers (58%) plan on throwing their old vapes into their household's general waste or recycling bin, prompting fears of fires in refuse trucks and waste centres. This is despite 71% of vapers admitting that they are aware that improper disposal of vapes can cause fires. Disposable vapes contain lithium-ion batteries, which if damaged can create explosive and highly toxic fires that are almost impossible to put out – a process known as thermal runaway. However, the incorrect disposal of these vapes in the general waste system can cause bigger issues. When general rubbish or recycling is collected, vapes are often crushed, compacted, punctured or soaked in liquids. This can cause the batteries within them to overheat or ignite, leading to fires that put workers at risk, risking millions of pounds worth of damage and disruption to waste services. Even if they do not start a fire, damaged batteries release harmful chemicals and materials that can damage the environment if not recycled responsibly. Many vape retailers offer take-back services for disposable vapes. Some councils also have recycling points at household recycling centres. Consumers can check their local council's website to find out if this is available in their area. Giuseppe Capanna, product safety engineer at Electrical Safety First, said: 'This week we anticipate many disposable vapes will come to the end of their life following the ban. 'With reports of vapers having stockpiled these devices there is a risk that a large number of them could end up in the waste system if they are thrown out incorrectly in the household bin. 'These devices contain lithium-ion batteries that can explode or catch fire if damaged or crushed if they make their way into bin lorries, creating a ticking time bomb that puts refuse workers and communities at serious risk. 'The safest option is to recycle them properly. You can recycle them through retail take-back schemes or at a local recycling centre that has dedicated facilities.' The crackdown on the sale of the devices now makes it illegal for any retailer – ranging from corner shops to supermarkets – to sell them. The ban applies to both online and in-store sales across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and all disposable vapes whether or not they contain nicotine. Retailers are still allowed to sell reusable vapes. It follows the soaring use of disposable vapes in schools and a flood of plastic rubbish from the discarding of the devices. Rogue traders who continue to sell them risk a fine of £200 in the first instance, followed by an unlimited fine or jail time for repeat offending. Censuswide surveyed 1,003 UK adults who own a disposable vape between May 22-27.
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Reeves faces fresh pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing
Rachel Reeves is under renewed pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing, after an industry report suggested the government had significantly overestimated how many new homes would be built over the next few years. The chancellor is being urged by figures inside and outside government to spend heavily on affordable housing at this month's spending review, as a report by one of the country's biggest housing companies cast doubt on official forecasts. The findings from Savills suggest the government is further away from hitting its target of building 1.5m new homes than previously admitted. Its findings are likely to boost the arguments of Angela Rayner, the housing secretary, who is at loggerheads with Reeves over how much her department should be given to build new affordable homes. Kate Henderson, the chief executive of the National Housing Federation (NHF), which commissioned the report, said: 'This analysis shows that reaching the OBR's [Office for Budget Responsibility] forecasts, let alone the government's targets, will require a generational boost to investment in social and affordable housing.' Chris Buckle, the residential research director at Savills, added: 'The heroic rates of growth forecast by the OBR will not be achieved without further action from the government to support demand – particularly support for housing associations and an ambitious new grant funding programme.' One government source said funding for affordable homes was proving a sticking point in negotiations over June's spending review, with Rayner pushing for Reeves to spend much more heavily on it than the previous government did. Labour's vow to build 1.5m houses over the course of the parliament has been central to its promises on economic growth and tackling the cost of living. Hitting the target would require 300,000 net new additions to housing supply every year of the parliament – a level that has never been hit before. Ministers argue that they will be able to stimulate a housing boom by making changes to the planning system that make it far easier for private developers to invest in new schemes. Their claims have been bolstered by official forecasts from the OBR, which say there are likely to be 1.3m net new homes built over the five years to March 2030. Reeves welcomed that forecast in March, saying it showed the government was within 'touching distance' of hitting its target. However, the findings from Savills suggest ministers are much further from that target than Reeves's words suggest. First, the report says the 1.3m forecast applies to the whole of the UK, while the government's target applies only to England. It also highlights the fact that the OBR's forecast is for a period until March 2030, nearly a year after the latest possible date for the next election. Taken together, the report estimates the government is actually on track to oversee the building of 1m new homes by the end of the parliament – only two-thirds of the way to its target. In addition, Savills found the OBR had relied on historically high estimates of private housebuilding to create its forecast. In 2030, for example, the forecast says there are likely to be just over 1.2m private house sales, of which 160,000 will be newly built properties. This would be far in excess of historical trends, given that transaction volumes throughout the 2010s were closer to 1m, and that sales of newbuild properties rarely exceed 10% of the total number of transactions. If overall sales and sales of new properties remain closer to recent trends, it would mean only 100,000 new houses going on sale every year – less than two-thirds of the OBR's forecast. The OBR's forecasts also rely on affordable housebuilding rising in line with the private market, despite the fact that the number of new affordable homes being started has collapsed recently – down 35% in England in 2024 and 90% in London. The report comes amid a standoff between Reeves and Rayner over how much to spend on affordable housing until the end of the parliament. With less than two weeks to go until the chancellor announces departmental spending limits for the next three years, officials say the two cabinet ministers are yet to reach an agreement on the housing budget. At the March budget, Reeves announced an extra £2bn for the government's affordable homes programme in 2026-27. But Rayner is understood to be arguing for more, saying the extra money was billed at the time as a 'downpayment' on the government's housing commitments. She argues that the 1.5m target will be missed without much higher levels of support. The NHF has calculated that to meet housing need the government must build 90,000 new socially rented homes a year, which if entirely publicly funded would cost the government £11.5bn a year. The federation is also urging Reeves to guarantee that social rents should go up by 1 percentage point above inflation for the next 10 years – double the length of time the government has proposed. This would help buttress the finances of the country's housing associations, 11 of which recently wrote to the housing minister Matthew Pennycook warning of 'the worst housing situation in living memory'. Henderson said: 'This certainty of income is vital for housing associations to unlock the private investment needed to build new affordable homes and deliver growth, jobs and improved living standards.' Part of the government strategy for hitting its building targets is to reduce environmental protections, saying: 'We can't have a situation where a newt is more protected than people who desperately need housing.' But this is causing grave concern among environment groups who say that nature in England and the UK is already in crisis, that builders are already not fulfilling the promises they have made on nature, and that the delays in housebuilding are very unlikely to be entirely down to bats or newts. The OBR declined to comment.
Telegraph
21 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Man convicted after burning Koran in public
A man who set fire to a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish Consulate has been convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence. Hamit Coskun shouted 'f--- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism' while holding the religious text above his head during a protest on Feb 13. The 50-year-old, who was violently attacked by a passerby during the demonstration in London, went on trial last week, accused of an offence under the Public Order Act. At Westminster magistrates' court on Monday, he was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly conduct, which was motivated 'in part by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Coskun's lawyers argued that his prosecution was an attempt by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to reintroduce and expand blasphemy laws in the UK, 17 years after they were abolished. The CPS said that Coskun was not being prosecuted for burning the book. They argued it was the combination of his derogatory remarks about Islam and the fact that it was done in public that made it an offence. The CPS originally charged Coskun, who is an atheist, with harassing the 'religious institution of Islam'. However, the charge was later amended after free speech campaigners took up his cause and argued he was essentially being accused of blasphemy. District Judge John McGarva said, 'there was a real problem with the original charge, which referred to Islam as if it was a person, when it is not'. He said, however, that the current prosecution was not 'an attempt to bring back and expand blasphemy law.' He said: 'A decision needs to be made as to whether your conduct was simply you exercising your right to protest and freedom of speech or whether your behaviour crossed a line into criminal conduct.' Katy Thorne KC, Coskun's barrister, had argued that even the amended charges against him effectively criminalised any public burning of a religious book and were tantamount to blasphemy laws. 'It is effectively chilling the right of citizens to criticise religion,' she said. She said Coskun's actions were not motivated by hostility towards the followers of Islam but to the religion itself. Judge McGarva, however, said he did not accept that argument. Addressing Coskun, he said: 'You believe Islam is an ideology which encourages its followers to violent paedophilia and a disregard for the rights of non-believers. 'You don't distinguish between the two. I find you have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers. That is based on your experiences in Turkey and the experiences of your family.' 'Highly provocative actions' Giving his verdict, Judge McGarva said: 'Your actions in burning the Koran where you did were highly provocative, and your actions were accompanied by bad language in some cases directed toward the religion and were motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.' The judge ordered Coskun, who is currently claiming asylum, to pay a fine of £240. The court heard Coskun, who is now in hiding, had to flee his home country of Turkey two and a half years ago to escape persecution. He argued he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Giving evidence, Coskun made a number of comments about Islam, including claiming the majority of paedophiles are Muslim. Lawyers for the CPS insisted that Coskun was not being prosecuted for setting fire to the Koran. Philip McGhee, for the CPS, said: 'He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public.' He added: 'Nothing about the prosecution of this defendant for his words and actions has any impact on the ability of anyone to make any trenchant criticism of a religion. On Feb 13, Coskun, who is of Armenian-Kurdish descent, travelled from his home in the Midlands to the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge. He then set fire to the holy book and held it above his head, shouting, 'Islam is religion of terrorism'and 'f--- Islam'. As he did so, a passerby attacked him and appeared to slash at Coskun with a blade and then began kicking him when he fell to the ground. Although the man has admitted assaulting Coskun, he has denied using a knife in the attack. The man, whose identity is subject to reporting restrictions, will go on trial in 2027. 'We intend to appeal this verdict' The National Secular Society (NSS), which, alongside the Free Speech Union, paid for Coskun's legal fees, said the verdict 'jeopardises' free expression. A spokesperson for the FSU said: 'This is deeply disappointing. Everyone should be able to exercise their rights to protest peacefully and to freedom of expression, regardless of how offensive or upsetting it may be to some people. 'The Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society intend to appeal this verdict and keep on appealing it until it's overturned. If that means taking it all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, we will do so.' 'Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn't require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers. On the contrary, it requires people of faith to tolerate those who criticise and protest against their religion, just as their values and beliefs are tolerated.'
