Reform UK leader moans about Eurostar skipping stations without mentioning why
A Reform UK council leader moaned about Eurostar not stopping at two train stations - but didn't mention that a major reason they don't is down to Brexit.
The cross-channel train service used to stop at both Ashford International and Ebbsfleet International stations in Kent.
But services stopped during the pandemic and never restarted.
Eurostar bosses have said they want to bring the services back to Kent, but list Brexit among the main reasons they can't afford to.
This week, Kent Council's Reform UK leader Linden Kemkaran gave a speech outlining her priorities for the region.
She pledged to host an event to lure the train firm back to the region - promising to serve 'delicious Kentish food and wine, and show Eurostar exactly what they are missing.'
Eurostar is due to reconsider whether to restart services stopping at the two stations this year.
But in 2023, the firm's General Secretary, Gareth Williams, said new Brexit border checks 'pose a serious risk' to the company's business.
Even passengers who use e-gates at the main St Pancras hub need to have their passport stamped separately, causing huge queues at the station and forcing some trains to run with seats unsold.
Mr Williams said the pressure on border capacity had 'forced some really difficult commercial choices.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
How BBC 'impartiality' risks complicity in misinformation
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... When Tim Davie was appointed director general of the BBC, in the summer of 2020, he issued a statement outlining the challenges the corporation was facing, and emphasised his commitment to 'content of the highest quality and impartiality', saying this was absolutely central to its mission. It was a welcome statement, of course; but for those who had been paying attention to the evolving debate around 21st-century journalism, Davie's choice of language was slightly ominous, not least in his decision to place the idea of 'impartiality' front and centre. It is an idea much cherished by the BBC and mainstream media in general, of course. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Even today, you will hear producers and editors still recycling the old mantra that if news programmes are being criticised by both sides, then they must be doing something right; and that view probably made sense, during a long postwar period when the main job of 'impartial' political journalism in the UK was to hold the ring between two competing political parties with broadly similar attitudes to the political system within which they operated. READ MORE: Why a bland BBC report about migrants should make us fear for our future Boris Johnson campaigns for Brexit ahead of the 2016 referendum with a bus featuring a debunked claim about NHS funding (Picture: Stefan Rousseau) | PA Seismic Brexit debate All of that began to change, though, with the arrival of the internet, and the sudden rush into mainstream politics of attitudes to journalism and news previously only found in what was known as the gutter press. There have always been scurrilous newspapers, of course, doing the bidding of their wealthy owners at the expense of decency and truth; trashing trade unions, or running distraction from the realities of power by whipping up hatred against vulnerable minorities. Their views, though, tended to be held at bay by a political and media establishment which – particularly after the trauma of the Second World War – generally adopted more liberal and enlightened positions. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad All that, though, began to change with the seismic UK Brexit debate of 2015-2016, in which one side was broadly offering fact-based arguments about why EU membership was good for us, while the other mounted an unabashed social media campaign of wild disinformation, suggesting that the EU was responsible for evils ranging from the plight of polar bears to the alleged imminent extinction of the pint of beer. It is an understatement to say that the principle of 'impartiality' between these two camps served the BBC poorly, over the Brexit referendum period; and that campaign – orchestrated with the help of increasingly powerful right-wing networks across the Western world – only marked the beginning of the new media age we were entering, as Donald Trump swept into the White House in November 2016 on a tide of lies and fantasies, and then repeated that victory, more emphatically, in 2024. READ MORE: Why Donald Trump must remember Munich 1938 during Ukraine talks with Vladimir Putin Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Without evidence' Today, as a result, we have to endure torrents of abject nonsense and outright lies pouring forth from the White House in the guise of official statements and presidential speeches, on subjects ranging from climate change and the safety of vaccines to the quality of life on the streets of London. In the past week alone, the Trump government has peddled scaremongering lies about the crime situation in America's capital city of Washington; about freedom of speech in Germany and other European countries; and – most urgently – about Ukraine, where Trump's garbled version of events, sometimes blaming President Zelensky and his government for a conflict clearly triggered by Russian aggression, could literally threaten the freedom and security of millions, across Ukraine and Europe. Many serious media organisations, of course, have become slightly uneasy about this, and have begun to report some of President Trump's remarks with phrases like 'without evidence' attached; yet these fact-free tirades are still respectfully reported, often without any such caveats. And at the centre of all these journalistic issues, of course, lies the current horrific slaughter in Gaza, where – despite this week's deliberate targeting by the Israeli Defence Force of the respected Al Jazeera reporting team in Gaza, and a death toll of journalists unprecedented in history – the BBC and other Western broadcasters still feel obliged to 'balance' their reports from Palestinian journalists on the ground (no Western journalists are allowed into Gaza) by featuring long and, to many, ever more insulting and implausible statements from the Israeli government, trying to justify their actions. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Basic democratic principles It is time, in other words, for senior media executives like Tim Davie to begin to question whether the idea of 'impartiality' is any longer a useful or even reputable guide to how to cover such events. That serious journalists should seek to tell the truth goes without saying, however difficult and inconclusive that search may often be. The idea embodied in the word 'impartiality', though – that truth must lie somewhere halfway between these proud and deliberate purveyors of lies, and those who are still trying to base their politics on some connection with facts and evidence – is surely now a dead letter, and one that risks making once-respected media organisations complicit in reckless and dangerous campaigns of disinformation. Of course, disinformation can and does come from all sides in politics, as – on occasions – does intolerance, and disrespect for some of the basic democratic principles by which we are supposed to live. In these times, though – with Trump in the White House entertaining Benhjamin Netanyahu as an honoured guest, flying to Alaska to carve up Ukraine with his 'friend' Vladimir Putin, and sending his Vice-President on a princely UK holiday tour that involves insulting and lecturing his hosts daily from a position of profound ignorance – I think there can be no doubt about the prime source of the current tsunami of lies and lawlessness threatening our public life.
The National
8 hours ago
- The National
Scottish 85-year-old pens scathing letter to Keir Starmer
Welcome to this week's Branch Office Updates! Subscribe for free using the linked banner above. A SCOTTISH woman has written a scathing letter to Keir Starmer over the impact of the new immigration rules. Vicky Currie, 85, fears it will impact her 92-year-old husband Jim – who has Alzheimer's and requires the help of carers. The Prime Minister – during a speech in which he invoked far-right Enoch Powell-style language – announced significant changes to immigration rules to significantly reduce net migration in May. This included a new system to end automatic settlement and citizenship for anyone living here for five years, with migrants instead required to spend a decade in the UK before applying to stay. READ MORE: SNP demand UK Government act amid new Israeli plan to 'bury' Palestinian state The UK Government immigration changes will impact many sectors, but Scotland's care industry is one that is under particular threat given its high dependence on international workers. The National previously reported on how Perth and Kinross – as the region with the highest proportion of elderly people and also where Vicky and Jim live – will be disproportionately impacted. 'I feel compelled to write this letter as I am absolutely incensed, disgusted and outraged at the decision which you made on May 12 to significantly change the existing immigration rules,' she wrote in the letter to Starmer (below). (Image: Vicky Currie) 'Please explain to me why you think changing the five year to a 10 year citizenship rule will do anything to stop the illegal immigrants when, in actual fact, all it will be doing is making it too difficult, expensive and unfair for these lovely people to stay who initially came to this country legally under the five year rule. It's Brexit all over again except it's not European 'carers' this time!' Vicky went on to explain that it will directly impact her and her husband given the caring staff who take care of him may have to leave Scotland soon as a result and put further strain on Perth and Kinross's already struggling care sector. She added: 'These people came to this country legally, pay their taxes and work extremely hard for what I consider to be an underpaid, overworked and under-appreciated job. They ALWAYS treat my husband and me with respect and kindness and are a pleasure to have in your home.' Local SNP MP Pete Wishart said that Vicky and Jim's situation is a 'stark example of just how much damage the UK Government's immigration proposals are already causing across my constituency'. He added: 'Hard-working carers, much loved by their clients, are already planning to leave as a direct result of these proposals, right at a time when their presence here has never been more important. 'It would have been unimaginable not so long ago for a Labour Government to be demonising the very people who are helping to prop up our cherished public services. Wishart went on: 'Their direction of travel on this issue is alarming and flies in the face of our demographic reality. Unless they wake up to this, and abandon their futile 'Reform-lite' agenda, what we will see is more sick and elderly people in Perthshire and beyond being left without vital care support.' The UK Government has been approached for comment.
Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Spain rule change all UK passport holders should know about
Travel experts are warning Brits to check their passports now Holidaymakers planning getaways to Spain, among other destinations, are being urged to check their passports now. This is because of a lesser-known travel rule introduced after Brexit, which has been known to catch some people out. All UK residents require a valid passport for international travel. British passports can be obtained by British citizens, British overseas territories citizens, British overseas citizens, British subjects, British nationals (overseas), or British protected persons, according to HM Passport Office. And with the final weeks of summer holidays approaching, travel specialists at are warning travellers to check their documents now. Expert Alvaro Iturmendi said: "Nothing ruins the end-of-summer buzz faster than being turned away at the airport because your passport is not valid. "It is easier to get caught out than you might think. Our research found that less than half (43%) holidaygoers, know that if you are heading to the EU, your passport must have been issued less than 10 years before your departure date." As Mr Iturmendi clarified, UK passport holders visiting the Schengen zone - including Spain, France, Greece and many other European counties - must ensure their passport's "date of issue" falls within 10 years of their arrival date. Additionally, the passport's "expiry date" must extend at least three months beyond their intended departure from the Schengen zone. If your passport fails to meet entry requirements, you'll probably be turned away at your departure airport. So it's definitely worth double-checking yours right now. And if you're after a speedy replacement passport, it could set you back as much as £222 for the one-day premium service. The current estimated waiting period is a maximum of three weeks, though government officials warn it can occasionally drag on longer "if we need more information, or we need to interview you". Those affected will be contacted during the three-week timeframe. A standard adult passport for anyone aged 16 and above costs £94.50 when you apply online, or £107 if you use the paper application form.
