British tourists face price hikes for holidays to Europe under planned EU travel policy
Currently, plans are for holidaymakers from outside the bloc to pay €7 (£5.98) for an online permit when entering as part of the Etias scheme.
The system is due to be rolled out from next year, following the introduction of the Entry/Exit System, which will eventually require biometric data to be provided at the border.
But the European Union is considering raising the price to help with repayments on a €350 billion (£299 billion) debt used to fund the post-Covid recovery, according to Politico.
Etias, which stands for European Travel Information and Authorisation System, is emerging as one of the most popular tax options ahead of budget proposals next month, the publication said.
This would be a further blow to Brits, who already face longer queues and more red tape since Brexit.
'A possible adjustment of the fee' is being considered, a European Commission spokesperson told Politico.
And a note seen by the website saw the Polish rotating Council presidency write: 'It seems that there is a possibility of a gradual increase of the fee, strengthening the long-term revenue potential.'
The Mail has contacted the European Commission for comment.
The proposed €7 fee is cheaper than the £16 charged to apply for the UK's version, the Electronic Travel Authorisation, or the $21 (£15.60) price of the Electronic System for Travel Authorization used by the US.
The news comes at a time of softening of relations between the UK and EU, with hopes that tourists will face easier experiences at passport control and suffer less bureaucracy on the continent.
British tourists have begun using e-gates at Faro Airport after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer confirmed an agreement with EU leaders last month.
However, they are still facing queues of nearly half an hour.
Mark Francois, Conservative MP for Rayleigh and Wickford as well as chairman of the European Research Group of Tory Brexiteers, is unhappy with any potential price rise for the Etias.
'This just adds insult to injury over the Government's so-called Brexit reset,' he told GB News.
'Not only has it become apparent that promises of British tourists being fast-tracked through e-gates in EU countries were largely illusory, even when they do get through immigration, they will now pay extra for the privilege.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Senior judges reveal regret at handing out ‘unfair' indefinite jail terms and call for scandal to be ‘put right'
Senior judges who imposed 'unfair' indefinite jail terms, which have left scores of inmates locked up for minor offences languishing in prison for decades, have revealed their regret for their part in the 'injustice'. Former High Court judge Sir John Saunders said he would apologise to offenders he handed imprisonment for public protection (IPP) jail terms, which were scrapped in 2012, but not retrospectively, leaving thousands already jailed incarcerated with no release date. Now the very judges who dished out the punishment have joined calls for the government to take urgent action to help more than 2,500 prisoners still trapped under the abolished jail term, which has been branded 'psychological torture' by the UN. Victims of the scandal, whose tragic cases have been highlighted by The Independent, include Leroy Douglas, who has served almost 20 years for stealing a mobile phone; Thomas White, 42, who set himself alight in his cell and has served 13 years for stealing a phone; and Abdullahi Suleman, 41, who is still inside 19 years after he was jailed for a laptop robbery. Sir John, 76, who served as recorder of Birmingham before he was appointed to the High Court, told The Independent that if he met an IPP prisoner he had jailed who was years over tariff, he would apologise. 'I should say I'm really sorry this has happened, it's extremely unfair,' he said. 'I didn't want to be party to unfairness. I would feel very bad about it, I would apologise to them.' He said that when the sentence was introduced in 2005 by New Labour in a bid to be tough on crime, it appeared there was a 'certain degree of sense' to plans to ensure offenders completed rehabilitation courses before they were approved for release by the Parole Board. But judges had no idea those prisoners would find themselves trapped in prison indefinitely, often without access to the courses they needed to be released. He added: 'I think the essence of the job of a judge is to be fair. And we really do all try to do that. So when we conduct criminal trials, we attempt to be fair. In passing sentences, we attempt to be fair. 'If we have been party to something which has been accepted by everybody as unfair and we have been part of it… it's a bit of an affront to the job.' He and Simon Tonking, the former recorder of Stafford, have lobbied prisons minister Lord James Timpson to help those still trapped under the jail term. Both have backed a package of proposals put forward by an expert panel convened by the Howard League for Penal Reform, calling for IPP prisoners to be given a release date within a two-year window at their next parole hearing. Mr Tonking recalled imposing an IPP sentence with a minimum tariff of just six months for a relatively minor offence after a man was caught following a woman in an alley. 'Now I wonder what happened to him,' he told The Independent. 'He was in his late twenties. For all I know, he may still be there [in prison]. 'And when I look back at that case, I think I should have tried harder not to impose it.' Although he was doing his best to administer the laws in place at the time, he is now determined to be part of the solution. 'I don't feel guilty, but I do feel, having been part of that, I should be doing all I can to put what has turned out to be an injustice right,' he added. 'And I am driven in part by the fact that I was part of the administration of justice at a time when these sentences were being passed. 'I have been a part of the system that is wrong. I feel that I ought to be part of the system to put it right.' Successive governments have resisted calls to resentence IPP prisoners, claiming they cannot risk letting prisoners out until they have passed the Parole Board's release test. However, at least 94 inmates have taken their own lives in custody after losing hope of being freed, according to campaigners, with many struggling as their mental health deteriorates in prison. Mr Tonking urged the Labour government to use its majority to finally end the injustice by taking up the Howard League's proposals, adding: 'Virtually everybody who has had any professional dealings with IPP knows that it's unjust and now is the time to act.' The proposed reforms also include providing a package of mental health support for released IPP prisoners and tightening up the criteria for recalling them. Currently, many find themselves hauled back to prison indefinitely for minor breaches of strict licence conditions, despite committing no further offences. Paul Glenn, who last year retired from his role as the most senior judge in Stoke-on-Trent, also backed the charity's proposals. He told The Independent: 'Nobody envisaged that 10 years after they should have been released, they would still be in custody. The injustice there is pretty obvious. 'It's undoubtedly right that we should be sentencing people for what they have done, rather than what they might do in the future.' Prisons minister Lord Timpson said: 'It is absolutely right that the IPP sentence was abolished. 'As the IPP annual report shows, we have significantly improved support for these offenders, with greater access to rehabilitation and mental health support. 'There is more work to do as we reduce the number of IPP offenders in custody, but we will only do so in a way that protects the public.'
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
There's one union which doesn't stand by the profession which belongs to it
What is the point of a union if it does not stand up for the interests of its members? Say what you will about the antics of Aslef and the RMT – as The Telegraph has frequently pointed out, their industrial action has inflicted misery on millions of commuters who have to endure delays and cancellations on commuter trains and the London Underground – but their exorbitant demands on pay and conditions have clearly been to the benefit of train and Tube staff. The National Education Union (NEU), led by the avowed Marxist Daniel Kebede, has had a rather poorer record in defending some in the teaching profession. A teacher at Preston College in Lancashire posted on Facebook to say that Lucy Connolly was 'obviously wrong' to say what she had on the platform in the aftermath of last summer's Southport murders, and that the comments were 'appalling' but that she 'should not have been jailed' for them. A representative of the NEU at Preston College then made a formal complaint to the college, saying that the teacher's own posts were 'Islamophobic' and 'racially discriminatory'. After an investigation, the college dismissed the teacher for violating its policies, although this is now being challenged in the courts. The NEU did the very opposite of sticking up for a member of the profession. In this regard, it is a serial offender. The union has more than 34,000 members working in independent schools. Labour's imposition of VAT on school fees clearly goes directly against these members' interests. Some will lose their jobs as schools are no longer economically viable and close. Many more will see their conditions of employment not improve and pensions worsen as schools try to cut costs to balance their budgets and ameliorate the impact of the tax hike on parents. But the NEU did not campaign against the move, saying that they could 'best use their influence behind the scenes'. Ideology seemingly trumps members' interests. Teachers deserve better.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Concrete sales plunge to 62-year low as hopes for Labour's building boom fade
Demand for concrete has fallen to its lowest level since 1963 in a serious blow to Labour's hopes of building more houses. Sales of ready-mixed concrete fell by 11.5pc in the three months to June against the previous three months, according to data from the Mineral Products Association (MPA), which represents producers. The product is widely-used in housebuilding to lay foundations, and provide the base for flooring and driveways. The figures suggest that Labour will miss its target of building 1.5m new homes by the end of this Parliament 'by a significant margin', the MPA said. Concrete sales have fallen by a third in 10 years, and more than halved over the last 20 years. The drop means that annual sales have not been this low since 1963 – before the nationwide housing and infrastructure building boom that transformed Britain. The MPA said that sales of other building materials, such as mortar and sand, also fell, with demand for most products at 'historically low levels'.
