Will Brits soon be able to use e-gates at European airports? Only if the EU agrees
British holidaymakers could use EU passport control lanes on the Continent again under the new deal with Europe struck yesterday – but only if member states agree to make the changes.
Sir Keir Starmer said the agreement would allow UK travellers to go through EU 'e-gates' rather than manual passport checks, 'ending those huge queues at passport control'.
And No 10's official X account said British nationals 'will now be able to use e-gates... so you can start your holiday sooner'.
However, it will be up to EU member states to update their border security checks and decide when to introduce it. The move will also depend on the introduction of the EU's new Entry/Exit System (EES), which will require travellers to give their fingerprints and pay a £6 fee.
Asked when Britons may be able to use e-gates, the Prime Minister said: 'I want it done as soon as possible, and that's why I urge EU member states now to do it.'
A Government official said member states had been using 'slightly different interpretations' of EU border control rules until now, and the new deal made clear there was 'no legal obstacle' to UK citizens using e-gates.
The official summit statement said there would be 'potential use of e-gates where appropriate', adding there would be no legal bar on UK nationals using them 'after the introduction of the EES'.
Yesterday's agreement also set out how Brussels will work more closely with the UK to combat illegal immigration and crime.
It said they would 'explore ways' to exchange fingerprints, DNA, criminal records of third country nationals and facial recognition imagery.
On illegal immigration, the PM said yesterday: 'The previous deal left a huge gap in our ability to work together to tackle illegal migration.
So this deal closes that gap so we can work across migration routes to end the crisis and smash the criminal gangs.'
However, the summit agreement did not go into detail on the matter besides stating the two parties 'should work together on practical and innovative approaches to reduce irregular migration' and setting out aims for 'closer co-operation'.
The deal also did not outline renewed British access to the EU's asylum fingerprint database, Eurodac, which officials said would play a vital role in identifying illegal migrants who previously claimed refugee status on the Continent.
It comes as Keir Starmer was accused of a great Brexit betrayal last night after agreeing a death that hands Brussels control of British laws, money and fish.
The Prime Minister faced a furious backlash over a 'surrender pact' that will make Britain a 'rule-taker', forced to follow EU diktats with no say over them.
Sir Keir agreed to restart payments to the EU budget which could run into hundreds of millions of pounds a year. And, to the fury of Britain's beleaguered fishermen, he caved in to French demands to allow access for EU trawlers until at least 2038 – more than 20 years after the public voted to take back control.
The agreement also paves the way for a 'youth mobility deal' which could eventually grant 80 million young Europeans the right to live and work temporarily in the UK.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Revealed: Labour-run councils are housing 3 times as many asylum seekers as Reform-controlled areas - so how many are in YOUR authority?
Labour-ran councils are bearing the brunt of Britain's asylum crisis, according to an analysis which piles even more pressure on Keir Starmer. Authorities controlled by Sir Keir's party house more than 26 asylum seekers for every 10,000 residents – almost triple the rate of councils now under Reform's watch, MailOnline can reveal today. Pollsters warn Labour may become victims of Reform's 'humongous strides' unless the 'hot topic' in traditional Red Wall strongholds is addressed. Wary of the threat posed by Nigel Farage 's outfit, which has seized on the public's immigration fears, Sir Keir earlier this month promised to deliver Brits what they had 'asked for time and time again'. The Prime Minister, who warned mass immigration risked turning us into an 'island of strangers', unveiled a package to 'take back control of our borders'. The skills threshold will be hiked and rules on fluency in English toughened under the Government's plan to bring down annual inflows by around 100,000. Basking in Reform's extraordinary dominance in May's local elections, Mr Farage vowed to reject migrants across his party's 10 newly-gained councils. Zia Yusuf, the party chair and a major donor, later promised to use 'every instrument of power' to do so, including the threat of court action. MailOnline analysis, based on Home Office figures, show there are nine asylum seekers for 10,000 residents across those Reform-held councils, including Lincolnshire and County Durham. For comparison, the UK-wide average is 16. The figure for councils under Tory rule is 11.5. Twenty-one of the 218 upper-tier local authorities in MailOnline's audit supported no asylum seekers. The Labour-run councils housing the most asylum seekers, in relation to their population, are Hounslow (72 per 10,000) Halton (70) and Coventry (59). The council housing the most, Hillingdon (94), is run by Tories. Chris Hopkins, political research director at polling firm Savanta, believes immigration is a major hurdle for Sir Keir's Government. He said: 'Immigration and asylum is increasing in salience among the British public, probably is reaching the highs now of sort of 2015/2016 to be honest, having taken a bit of a drop off during the pandemic. 'I'm not going to say the next election is going to be about immigration but it definitely does feel like the hot topic of the moment. 'It presents a problem – not just for the Labour Party – but for any government of any colour because there is a sense in the country that numbers are too high.' Mr Hopkins added: 'There is a sense that Labour's opposition now is Reform UK, not the Conservatives. 'Obviously Reform UK are known, to some extent, as a single issue, anti-immigration party. So Labour have to navigate that ultimately, and need to be seen acting on that. 'I think that there's a danger of them trying to "out Reform" Reform, which isn't going to work for them as it didn't work for Rishi Sunak. 'And I think that Labour potentially risk alienating some of their more Left-wing liberal voters to the Liberal Democrats or Greens if they go down that route. 'A lot could change at the next General Election (to be held no later than August 2029) but the direction of travel at the minute is Reform UK making humongous strides.' Polls suggest that Labour's failure to address sky high immigration could spell further disaster for the party at the ballot box. A recent survey by IPSOS found 68 per cent of the public deem the numbers coming to the UK to seek refugee status or asylum too high. And 33 per cent think they are doing a worse job on immigration than the Tories. Just 17 per cent feel Labour is handling it better. Labour's highest-profile defeat in May's locals was in the Runcorn by-election, where Reform narrowly beat them by six votes. In the run-up to polling day, both parties promised to close a 425-bed hotel in the constituency that was being used by the Home Office to house asylum seekers. Locals in the Cheshire town claimed crime had increased in the area since it started housing asylum seekers in 2020. On a national level, Downing Street's sweeping new plan will increase efforts to stop housing asylum seekers in hotels. It comes as a series of investigations by MailOnline have revealed the 'absurd' reality of asylum claims in Britain, with critics saying that it was proof we've become a 'soft touch'. Fuelled by the small boats crisis plaguing the Channel, a record 108,000 applications were lodged in 2024. Claims from dozens of countries, including Afghanistan and Iran, have doubled over the last 20 years. Last month we revealed that citizens in the US, Australia and even Scandinavia are trying to claim asylum here – despite already residing in wealthy Western countries that are free of major human rights abuses. And a fortnight ago we exposed how Northumberland council in Britain is housing 600 times more asylum seekers now than a decade ago. Home Office policy is to disperse asylum seekers around the country. Officials insist they are not given a choice as to location and the accommodation. Local authorities also do not get a say in how many are housed in their areas, insiders insist. They are given £1,200 for each asylum seeker being housed in their boundaries. A spokesman for the Local Government Association said: 'We are keen to continue to work with government on a more equitable approach across asylum and resettlement. 'One that takes into account wider housing, homelessness and cohesion challenges, with sufficient lead in time for engagement with councils on any new sites.' The Home Office says value for money, community cohesion and the wellbeing of those working and living in asylum accommodation will continue to be at the 'forefront of decision-making'. Although authorities can object, they have little formal power to actually stop asylum seekers being housed in their areas. Newly-elected Reform politicians have vowed to stand up for their communities and fight against their dispersal. Mr Farage said he was opposed to the government 'plonking scores of young men' in counties where his party now has control. He has vowed to 'resist' asylum seekers being housed in the counties where Reform was in control, claiming they were being 'dumped into the north of England, getting everything for free'. 'People hate them,' he told The Telegraph. 'They see a sense of total unfairness that they are working themselves to bits to pay tax for young men who can illegally come into the country and be given everything for free.' Newly-elected County Durham councillor and ex-GB News presenter Darren Grimes said Reform would not 'allow our communities to be a dumping ground for illegal migrants'. And in her victory speech, Reform's new mayor for Greater Lincolnshire Dame Andrea Jenkyns proposed housing them in tents instead, saying 'tents are good enough for France; they should be good enough for you in Britain.' Her comments prompted some rival candidates to walk off the stage in outrage. As well as getting free accomodation, asylum seekers are also entitled to UK taxpayer-funded NHS healthcare, prescriptions, dental care and children under 18 are required to go to school (where they may be able to get free meals). If their accommodation provides meals each person gets £8.86 per week, this rises to £49.18 per week if no meals are provided. Extra money is also provided to pregnant mothers and young children. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We are working to fairly disperse asylum seekers across the country, consulting closely with local authorities to further reduce our reliance on hotels and deliver better value for money for taxpayers, while giving control back to communities through our Plan for Change. 'We've taken immediate action to fix the broken asylum system this government inherited, by increasing asylum decision making by 52 per cent and removing nearly 30,000 people with no right to be here. 'By restoring grip on the system and speeding up decision making, we will end the use of hotels and are forecast to save the taxpayer £4 billion by the end of 2026.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Spending plans for British Council may force it to close in 60 countries, sources say
Ministers have asked the British Council to draw up spending plans that would force it to close in as many as 60 countries, sources have told the Guardian, in the latest sign of the impact of Keir Starmer's decision to slash the aid budget. The council has been asked to draw up two sets of spending plans as part of Wednesday's spending review: one in which its funding would remain the same in cash terms and one in which it would be cut by 2% in cash terms each year. The scenarios are the same as those that have been demanded of the BBC World Service, and would mean the council having to shut completely in large parts of the world. The plans are likely to add to warnings that the government's cuts to overseas aid are at risk of damaging its soft power just as Russia and China are putting more resources into strengthening theirs. Scott McDonald, the council's chief executive, would not comment on the Treasury's demands, but said: 'The British Council plays a vital role in delivering UK soft power around the globe. 'Investment in soft power is imperative to any nation that wishes to be instrumental on the world stage. Over the last three years we have taken £180m of costs out of the organisation through a substantial transformation plan, but the amount of funding we receive from the UK government will have an impact on country closures.' McDonald has previously warned that financial pressures on the council could make it 'disappear' within a decade. The council receives £1bn in revenue each year, but 85% of that comes from selling its English-language services around the world. In 2024-25, it received £163m in a government grant, most of which came from the international aid budget. Earlier this year, the prime minister announced he would slash the aid budget from 0.5% of gross domestic product to 0.3%, freeing up about £6bn in extra spending for defence. The reductions to the aid budget are now being felt in Whitehall, with the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, having imposed what insiders say are swingeing cuts on the Foreign Office. As a result, institutions such as the British Council and BBC World Service are being asked to model major spending reductions. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Those close to the negotiations with the government say the council had asked for an additional £20m in funding per year, not least to help repay a £197m loan to keep it running during the pandemic. That loan, which was made on commercial terms, has now been rolled over for another 18 months, but insiders say the repayments are costing it £14m a year. If it receives no extra cash in the next few years, those close to the talks say, it will have to close in 40 countries. Cuts of 2% in cash terms would require 60 closures. Both of these would be on top of the 20 office closures that it announced in 2021, when it was told to reduce its budget by £185m over five years. The council's financial crisis is causing alarm among politicians and military chiefs, who say its activities boost Britain's national security. Dozens of high-profile figures recently wrote to the prime minister urging him not to cut the council's funding. They included the former home secretary James Cleverly, the former defence secretaries Grant Shapps, Ben Wallace and Michael Fallon, the former foreign secretary David Miliband, and the former military chiefs Richard Dannatt and David Richards. The letter warned: 'As we compete harder for global influence, the need for the British Council's unique contribution to our security is greater than ever. We call upon you to invest in this great national asset and force-multiplier, before it is too late.' Peter Ricketts, the former national security adviser who organised the letter, told the Guardian: 'A lot of defence people will tell you that a small investment in soft power such as the British Council is worth a lot of money on the military side.' A Foreign Office spokesperson said: 'Despite the tough fiscal situation, we continue to back the British Council with over £160m in 2025-26.' The spokesperson added that no decisions had yet been taken over its funding for the next few years.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Poll shows voters have huge housing demand amid 'charter for greed' warning
Polling by YouGov found people are three times more likely to want the Government to build more social housing than encouraging developers to build more private homes Voters are three times more likely to want the Government to build more social housing than encouraging developers to build private homes, new polling shows. Figures show 58% want ministers to set a target for the amount of social housing included in plans to build 1.5million homes by 2029. According to polling by YouGov data, 48% of the public say that the government should focus on building more social homes. Just 14% said the government should encourage developers to build more private homes. It comes as the government's Planning and Infrastructure Bill returns to Parliament for its third reading this week. Green MP Ellie Chowns told The Mirror that without an explicit social housing commitment, the Bill is a "charter for developers' greed". She said: 'A place to call home is the foundation of a good life. But right now a secure home is out of reach for too many people – rents are spiralling, families are struggling to afford a place to live, and over a million people are stuck on housing waiting lists. "But instead of tackling the crisis head-on by building the social housing we need, this government is writing a charter for developers' greed, giving them carte blanche to bulldoze over communities and nature in order to build luxury homes only the richest can afford. "As a result, big developers will be able to line their pockets even further while ordinary people are locked out of affording a decent home." The landmark bill, put forward in March, will set out how the delivery process for critical infrastructure will be streamlined. Deputy PM Angela Rayner said at the time: "We need to reform the system to ensure it is sensible and balanced, and does not create unintended delays - putting a hold on people's lives and harming our efforts to build the homes people desperately need.' A spokesman from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said: 'The government inherited an unprecedented housing crisis, but we will get Britain building again and deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation. 'Through our Plan for Change, we are providing an £800 million top up to the Affordable Homes Programme and a £2 billion down payment on further funding, while our landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill will drive housebuilding to meet our stretching target of 1.5 million homes.' :: YouGov polled 2,241 adults between 2 and 3 :: 'This isn't how we should be fixing the housing crisis' By Ellie Chowns, Green MP for North Herefordshire A place to call home is the foundation of a good life. But across the country, for too many people, just keeping a roof over their heads is a struggle. This Labour government came into power promising to fix this and finally tackle the housing crisis. But instead, they're writing legislation that would give big developers a blank cheque to build pretty much whatever they want, wherever they want – no matter the cost to nature, and with no guarantee that new homes will be affordable. We know what the result will be: more luxury housing in out-of-town developments that only the richest can afford, while everyone else is still priced out of home ownership, falling behind on rent, or stuck on housing waiting lists. This isn't what the public want. On the contrary: Brits are three times more likely to want the government to focus on building social housing, than on encouraging developers to build private homes. And it's not what this country deserves. Everyone has the right to a warm, safe, affordable home - and it's the government's duty to deliver it. That's why I'm demanding that the government use the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to restore Britain's social housing - by setting targets for building homes for social rent, and ensuring these homes are zero carbon and fit for the future. It's time to ask Ministers: will you build the homes we need, or sell us out to developers' greed?
