Firstly regarding the EU immigration policy. I don't care as we are no longer in the EU however, it seems that having just squeezed it through, some countries are already saying that they aren't going to meet the supposed obligations. Mind you at $25,000 per person penalty that was quoted in the press release, it's probably good economics compared to the long term cost of taking them.
It was 20,000 euros. We would save a fortune if we were still in. In all seriousness, I am surprised that they agreed a policy. The vast majority of the asylum seekers arrive by boat. It therefore affects a small number of countries far more than the rest. Some of the members dont even have a coastline, and are hardly affected. Countries like Spain, Greece, and Italy see the bulk of them. So the previous rule that they had to stay in the first safe country that they arrived at, was surely unfair to them.
As an aside where does all that money go? I'll wager it doesn't go back into helping the poorest members.
The richer countries are net contributors, the poorer ones arent.
That hardly shows a unified approach.
They are 27 independent countries, and the majority was in favour.
Secondly, you seem to believe that every scare story in the UK associated with Brexit is true instead of realising that Brexit is simply a convenient excuse for every failing.
I only post those that I think are true. You, on the other hand post anything that is anti EU, whether it stands up to scrutiny or not.
No drugs, blame Brexit. Higher cost of living, blame Brexit. Awful weather, blame Brexit.
That I suppose sums up your view. Last week we intended to implement border checks that we have put off for the four years since we left. Doing so would have created more costs for businesses, more paperwork, slowed down the supply chain, increased inflation, and higher costs for consumers. This week, because of the outcry, they are being delayed again until October. This just puts off the evil day. Do you ever ask yourself why Brexit is ever being blamed for anything?
I voted leave and maybe had remain actually campaigned I may have understood more of the ramifications of leaving. However, the continual bleating of the Europhiles about every ill in the UK being down to leaving puts my BS detector on maximum.
Perhaps you are right, maybe you would have. I have given up. Although I appreciate some havent. Even though I have given up, it still winds me up when some of the Tories come out with their so called advantages of Brexit. The other thing about Brexit is that even though we left more than 4 years ago, Brexit will not end anytime soon.
I feel that the remainers doth protest too much.
I see this thread as a discussion on the effects of Brexit. I dont think that many people see us rejoining in the near future.
You often, although not always, post salient, erudite, articles in this thread many of which require a great deal of effort to understand. I represent the alternative and post stuff as such. I am in effect the one sentence response to your deep, thoughtful missives.
However, let me finish by saying that as much as I disagree with much of what you post in this thread, I am always happy to read your opinions and absolutely respect them and you.
Well I have a holiday booked for May 2005 on the Costa del Sol and so let's see if and when the holiday company instructs me to do this.
Every week is a new scare story aimed at trying to make us stay at home.
Spain needn't worry because if all the anti tourist rubbish spouted by the press and the "£97 per person per day money entry requirement" scare is believed by enough people then Spain will be deserted anyway.
Well I have a holiday booked for May 2005 on the Costa del Sol and so let's see if and when the holiday company instructs me to do this.
Every week is a new scare story aimed at trying to make us stay at home.
Spain needn't worry because if all the anti tourist rubbish spouted by the press and the "£97 per person per day money entry requirement" scare is believed by enough people then Spain will be deserted anyway.
I assume you meant to say 2025. I am not sure about scare stories, at least some of them are facts. While we were members, we had Freedom of Movement. This obviously doesnt apply since we left. So I suppose it is logical to expect changes at some point. It is funny because we are doing the same thing, but from April 2025. I started a thread about it, you must have missed it. Rollout of eVisas begins as Government aims for digital immigration by 2025 https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby/community/forums#/discussion/192024/rollout-of-evisas-begins-as-government-aims-for-digital-immigration-by-2025 So if your holiday is later than that you can expect delays in both directions. The purpose of this is to strengthen border security, which can only be a good thing. It is difficult to knock the EU, for something we are also doing.
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
I am not sure we know that yet.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
I dont think that package tour operators ever divert people. I am not sure what constitutes a problematic destination in your eyes.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving. Lots of economies rely on tourism.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
No they wont. Many of the illegals that live in this country rely on the fact that they cant be identified. As we cant deport them unless we are aware of where they came from. Others we have deported return with forged ID. So having photo ID, and a finger print will make a massive difference. That is the whole point of it.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
That is a really foolish interpretation. I watched one of the series on the telly about border control. Cutting a long story short. Illegals hide their passports. When they caught they refuse to say where they are from. So we cant deport them, and have to release them on bail. They then disappear. They get caught somewhere else a few weeks later. The same process starts all over again, until the next time. We have no recourse.
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It wont happen.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
This is a much more secure system, which in time will be operated efficiently.
10 European Tourist Destinations You’ll Have to Pay a New Tax to Enter in 2024
Madrid, Spain The Spanish capital has also considered introducing a new tourist tax in 2024, intended to combat over-tourism. While the measure has not been confirmed yet, the city is one of the most affected by the large number of visitors every year and imposing such a measure would be beneficial for Spaniards.
I thought it was a reasonable response. You seem to think that everything that happens in Europe is down to, or the fault of the EU. When there are 27 member countries, all with their own governments, that introduce their own legislation. As our government did throughout the time we were members. I think there will be delays caused by the imposition of a new system. Usually these delays will be reduced as people become more used to them. In my opinion our current immigration system belongs in the dark ages. It is absolutely useless, and not fit for purpose. The new system will definitely represent progress.
As far as tourist taxes are concerned, I am sure that travellers will make their own minds up, as to whether they think they are value for money. And choose alternative destinations should they think that they are too high in particular destinations.
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
Britons may put off Europe holidays to avoid chaos of post-Brexit digital border
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
Widely reported £97 tourist rule is ‘a hoax’, says Spanish government Amid widespread reports about financial checks on visiting British tourists, the Spanish Ministry of the Interior sets the record straight
The Spanish government has accused the English media of spreading “a hoax” about British tourists being asked to prove they have a certain amount of money to enter the country.
In recent weeks, there have been widespread news reports claiming holidaymakers may have to show proof of funds amounting to £97 per day for the duration of their visit, or else risk being denied entry by Spanish border officers.
The rule has been described by some news outlets as “controversial” and British tourists have supposedly “slammed” the rule and threatened to “boycott” Spain as a result.
However, a spokesperson for the Spanish Ministry of the Interior has told The Telegraph that the £97 rule has been mis-reported in Britain.
“These are not systematic controls for tourists and no entry denial has occurred for this reason,” they said. “This is a hoax spread from time to time by the English media, lacking rigour and without any basis.”
While the rule does exist in the fine print of the Schengen Borders Code, it is important to be aware of the wider context. Namely: it is not a new rule, it does not only affect UK visitors, and there is currently no precedent of it causing any problems for British tourists.
Does the ‘£97 per day rule’ actually exist? Yes. Technically, third-nation (non-EU) citizens entering Spain could be asked to provide evidence that they have the funds to sustain their stay in the country. If asked, visitors may have to show that they have a minimum of €113.40 (£96.80) per day for the duration of their trip. This proof could be in the form of cash, traveller’s cheques, or a credit card plus a printed statement. You may also be asked for proof of accommodation and a return or onward ticket. Full details of the rule can be found on the Spanish Ministry of the Interior website.
Has anyone ever been denied entry? The Spanish Ministry of the Interior confirmed that no British tourist has been denied entry to Spain after failing to provide evidence of funds.
It appears tourists are rarely quizzed at all. In a poll carried out by Chelsea Dickenson of cheapholidayexpert.com, 98.6 per cent of 1,373 respondents said they hadn’t been asked for evidence at passport control in Spain. Just three gave examples of being asked for proof of funds (two in Alicante, one in Madrid) – each said they were waved through when they presented a credit card.
Telegraph Travel expert Annie Bennett, who frequently flies between the UK and Spain, says she has never encountered the £97 rule being enforced and called the reports “tabloid hysteria”.
Sally Davies, The Telegraph’s Barcelona expert, says: “It’s just nonsense, all of it. Spain adores tourists and falls over itself to accommodate them.”
Is the rule new to 2024? No. It officially came into effect for British holidaymakers when the UK left the European Union on January 1 2021. Then, the daily amount listed in the Spanish border control fine print was €100 (£83.52 at the time).
Are British tourists the only people affected? No. The proof of funds technicality applies to any non-Schengen area citizen. But Spanish passport officers do not seem to be enforcing it on holidaymakers from further afield, either. Ken Baldwin, a director and specialist travel adviser at the travel agency Totally Spain, told The Telegraph: “It has not affected any of our clients, who come primarily from the United States and Canada. [It has] never been brought up with us.”
Is Spain the only European country enforcing this rule? No. The requirement for tourists to provide evidence of funds applies to all Schengen area countries, not just Spain. And the cash amount varies between countries. For example, France has a similar rule requiring (possible) proof of €120 per day, Belgium’s is €95, Poland’s is €66, Germany’s is €45: the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has a note across all of its EU pages warning that you may be asked for proof of funds at border control.
Do I need to do anything about this before my holiday? If you want to avoid any possible friction at passport control, bring printed evidence of your accommodation booking, your return flight details, plus a recent credit card statement along with the card itself – or cash, although travelling with large quantities of cash comes with obvious risks. If you do not do the above, rest assured there is currently no precedent that you would be turned around at Spanish (or any EU nation’s) passport control for not having sufficient funds, and proof of accommodation and return flight details should be easily accessed in your emails, if required.
I'm not knocking them. I'm simply saying that the outcome will not be as bad as the press would have us believe.
I am not sure we know that yet.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
I dont think that package tour operators ever divert people. I am not sure what constitutes a problematic destination in your eyes.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving. Lots of economies rely on tourism.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
No they wont. Many of the illegals that live in this country rely on the fact that they cant be identified. As we cant deport them unless we are aware of where they came from. Others we have deported return with forged ID. So having photo ID, and a finger print will make a massive difference. That is the whole point of it.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
That is a really foolish interpretation. I watched one of the series on the telly about border control. Cutting a long story short. Illegals hide their passports. When they caught they refuse to say where they are from. So we cant deport them, and have to release them on bail. They then disappear. They get caught somewhere else a few weeks later. The same process starts all over again, until the next time. We have no recourse.
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It wont happen.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
This is a much more secure system, which in time will be operated efficiently.
10 European Tourist Destinations You’ll Have to Pay a New Tax to Enter in 2024
Madrid, Spain The Spanish capital has also considered introducing a new tourist tax in 2024, intended to combat over-tourism. While the measure has not been confirmed yet, the city is one of the most affected by the large number of visitors every year and imposing such a measure would be beneficial for Spaniards.
Drug shortages, now normal in UK, made worse by Brexit, report warns Some shortages are so serious they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses say
Drug shortages, now normal in UK, made worse by Brexit, report warns Some shortages are so serious they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses say
Drug shortages are a “new normal” in the UK and are being exacerbated by Brexit, a report by the Nuffield Trust health thinktank has warned. A dramatic recent spike in the number of drugs that are unavailable has created serious problems for doctors, pharmacists, the NHS and patients, it found.
The number of warnings drug companies have issued about impending supply problems for certain products has more than doubled from 648 in 2020 to 1,634 last year.
Mark Dayan, the report’s lead author and the Nuffield Trust’s Brexit programme lead, said: “The rise in shortages of vital medicines from rare to commonplace has been a shocking development that few would have expected a decade ago.”
The UK has been struggling since last year with major shortages of drugs to treat ADHD, type 2 diabetes and epilepsy. Three ADHD drugs that were in short supply were meant to be back in normal circulation by the end of 2023 but remain hard to obtain.
Some medicine shortages are so serious that they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses warned.
Health charities have seen a sharp rise in calls from patients unable to obtain their usual medication. Nicola Swanborough, head of external affairs at the Epilepsy Society, said: “Our helpline has been inundated with calls from desperate people who are having to travel miles, often visiting multiple pharmacies to try and access their medication.”
Paul Rees, the chief executive of the National Pharmacy Association, which represents most of the UK’s 7,000 independently owned pharmacies, said: “Supply shortages are a real and present danger to those patients who rely on life-saving medicines for their wellbeing. Pharmacy teams have seen the problems get worse in this country over recent years, putting more patients at risk.
“Pharmacists … are spending hours a day hunting down stock, yet too often have to turn patients away. It’s distressing when pharmacy teams find themselves unable to provide a prompt medicines services, through no fault of their own.”
Global manufacturing problems linked to Covid, inflation, the war in Ukraine and global instability have helped cause the UK’s unprecedented inability to ensure patients can access drugs.
But Britain’s departure from the EU in 2020 has significantly aggravated the problem, laid bare the “fragility” of the country’s medicines supply networks and could lead to the situation worsening, the report said.
“A clear picture emerged of underlying fragilities at a global and UK level, not fundamentally rooted in Brexit but exacerbated by it in some specific ways, especially through some companies removing the UK from their supply chains,” it said.
The UK’s exit from the single market has disrupted the previously smooth supply of drugs, for example through the creation of a requirement for customs checks at the border, as has Britain’s decision to leave the EU’s European Medicines Agency and start approving drugs itself. The UK is now much slower than the EU at making new drugs available, the report found.
Post-Brexit red tape has prompted some firms to stop supplying to the UK altogether.
The fact that the fall in sterling’s value after the Brexit vote in 2016 coincided with drugs being in much shorter supply globally due to pharmaceutical firms experiencing shortages of ingredients, which drove up prices, has also played a key role in creating the shortages.
That has forced the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to agree to pay above the usual price for drugs that are scarce to try to ensure continuity of supply far more often than it used to. “Price concessions” rose tenfold from about 20 a month before 2016 to 199 a month in late 2022, and cost the NHS in England £220m in 2022-23, the thinktank found.
The report is based on Freedom of Information requests to health bodies as well as interviews and a roundtable discussion with key figures in the drugs industry, senior DHSC civil servants and European health bodies.
It warned that Brexit had created “further risks … for the UK”. The Nuffield Trust said drug shortages could get worse because the EU’s 27 countries have recently decided to act as a unified bloc to try to minimise the impact of global scarcity, which could leave supplying Britain even less of a priority for drug companies.
Dr Andrew Hill, an expert in the drugs industry at Liverpool University, said: “With this background stress on global supplies, the UK is now more vulnerable to drug shortages. The UK is now stuck behind the US and Europe in the queue for essential drugs. Other countries offer high prices and easier access, with simpler regulations for supply.”
Ministers should agree to pay more for generic medicines, which are usually much cheaper than branded ones, to help tackle shortages, Hill added.
The Royal Pharmaceutical Society, which represents pharmacists, urged ministers to amend the law to allow community pharmacists to circumvent shortages by giving patients slightly different prescriptions, as their counterparts in hospitals already do.
“At present, if a liquid version of a medicine is available but tablets have been prescribed and are out of stock, the pharmacist cannot provide the liquid version,” said James Davies, the society’s director for England. “The patient has no choice but to return to the prescriber for a new prescription, which causes unnecessary workload for GPs and delay for the patient.”
DHSC said most drugs remained available. “Concessionary prices can arise for various reasons and cannot be linked to shortages,” a DHSC spokesperson said.
“Our priority is to ensure patients continue to get the treatments they need. There are around 14,000 licensed medicines and the overwhelming majority are in good supply.”
Ok the shortage of drugs such as Ozempic and Semalglutide both used in the treatment of diabeties is not down to Brexit.
It is down to the realisation and understanding that these drugs in injectable form are huge appetite suppressants and are therefore wanted in bulk by the "slimming industry".
Both are readily available online and easy to obtain. This is because the slimming clinics and weight loss companies order massive amounts in bulk, way more than the penny pinching NHS and let's be honest if you're a big pharma corporation who are you going to sell to.
It's yet another example of the ready made excuse of Brexit being used to hide the inadequacies of Government purchasing departments.
I accept that other drugs may be in short supply due to issues relating to Brexit but the lack of these Diabeties drugs is down to the greed of the industry to make massive profits out of idle, overweight people wanting a quick fix instead of dieting properly. Eat less + Move more = weight loss.
My wife has had her Ozempic injection changed for a less effective orally administered drug due to "Supply difficulties", yet at a local gym I can get a 28 day injectable course for £56 which is equivalent to £2 per day.
Oh and before you ask why the press don't really expose this, where do you think these clinics and online therapies advertise.
Comments
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/sunak-rejects-offer-mobility-scheme-164913563.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/warning-brits-not-aware-big-090522063.html
Every week is a new scare story aimed at trying to make us stay at home.
Spain needn't worry because if all the anti tourist rubbish spouted by the press and the "£97 per person per day money entry requirement" scare is believed by enough people then Spain will be deserted anyway.
I am not sure about scare stories, at least some of them are facts.
While we were members, we had Freedom of Movement.
This obviously doesnt apply since we left.
So I suppose it is logical to expect changes at some point.
It is funny because we are doing the same thing, but from April 2025.
I started a thread about it, you must have missed it.
Rollout of eVisas begins as Government aims for digital immigration by 2025
https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby/community/forums#/discussion/192024/rollout-of-evisas-begins-as-government-aims-for-digital-immigration-by-2025
So if your holiday is later than that you can expect delays in both directions.
The purpose of this is to strengthen border security, which can only be a good thing.
It is difficult to knock the EU, for something we are also doing.
Regardless of how much the UK is now the pariah dog of Europe much of the economy that some of these members derive is based on tourism and Brits bring huge amounts of money into those economies. Given that money is the be all and end all, they can ill afford for the package companies to divert business to less problematic destinations.
In short money will talk, compromises made, tweaks implemented and much of the predicted chaos circumvented. Got to keep the tourist flow moving.
As for the UK, I fail to see how digital immigration can make borders more secure. People who will use this will be the same people who would wait in queues at passport control anyway. People overstaying or entering illegally will just carry on regardless.
At the end of the day it's just another way of implementing control by big brother, whether that be the British Government or the EU. Realistically it will solve nothing but allows the powers that be to say" Look how much we are investing in keeping you safe".
I would actually like to see it become so difficult and time consuming for Brits to go to the hot spots, just for a couple of years, that they don't bother at all. The collapse of some of the infrastructures of those places dependent on tourism would, to me, be both gratifying and amusing.
It won't happen of course. Like everything else, whilst we have the power to change anything we wish, we are too selfish as a species to make the sacrifices to bring about such change.
10 European Tourist Destinations You’ll Have to Pay a New Tax to Enter in 2024
Madrid, Spain
The Spanish capital has also considered introducing a new tourist tax in 2024, intended to combat over-tourism. While the measure has not been confirmed yet, the city is one of the most affected by the large number of visitors every year and imposing such a measure would be beneficial for Spaniards.
https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/10-european-tourist-destinations-youll-have-to-pay-a-new-tax-to-enter-in-2024/#:~:text=All European countries apply a tourist tax, which,in Vienna and Salzburg, Austria, is around €3.2.
I'm not biting.
You seem to think that everything that happens in Europe is down to, or the fault of the EU.
When there are 27 member countries, all with their own governments, that introduce their own legislation.
As our government did throughout the time we were members.
I think there will be delays caused by the imposition of a new system.
Usually these delays will be reduced as people become more used to them.
In my opinion our current immigration system belongs in the dark ages.
It is absolutely useless, and not fit for purpose.
The new system will definitely represent progress.
As far as tourist taxes are concerned, I am sure that travellers will make their own minds up, as to whether they think they are value for money.
And choose alternative destinations should they think that they are too high in particular destinations.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/labour-must-reset-relationship-with-eu-says-tony-blair/ar-AA1nojiO?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=5c2e52548f90475dab5fe3308bd84c17&ei=103
https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby/community/forums#/discussion/192069/refugee-who-left-uk-for-holiday-in-2008-stranded-in-east-africa-for-16-years/p1?new=1
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jenrick-future-tory-government-must-be-able-to-rip-up-northern-ireland-agreement/ar-AA1nq271?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=1ea1e0ebd13e44a491b982aba1608b79&ei=141
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/britons-may-put-off-europe-holidays-to-avoid-chaos-of-post-brexit-digital-border/ar-AA1nqgZz?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=1ea1e0ebd13e44a491b982aba1608b79&ei=178
Amid widespread reports about financial checks on visiting British tourists, the Spanish Ministry of the Interior sets the record straight
The Spanish government has accused the English media of spreading “a hoax” about British tourists being asked to prove they have a certain amount of money to enter the country.
In recent weeks, there have been widespread news reports claiming holidaymakers may have to show proof of funds amounting to £97 per day for the duration of their visit, or else risk being denied entry by Spanish border officers.
The rule has been described by some news outlets as “controversial” and British tourists have supposedly “slammed” the rule and threatened to “boycott” Spain as a result.
However, a spokesperson for the Spanish Ministry of the Interior has told The Telegraph that the £97 rule has been mis-reported in Britain.
“These are not systematic controls for tourists and no entry denial has occurred for this reason,” they said. “This is a hoax spread from time to time by the English media, lacking rigour and without any basis.”
While the rule does exist in the fine print of the Schengen Borders Code, it is important to be aware of the wider context. Namely: it is not a new rule, it does not only affect UK visitors, and there is currently no precedent of it causing any problems for British tourists.
Does the ‘£97 per day rule’ actually exist?
Yes. Technically, third-nation (non-EU) citizens entering Spain could be asked to provide evidence that they have the funds to sustain their stay in the country. If asked, visitors may have to show that they have a minimum of €113.40 (£96.80) per day for the duration of their trip. This proof could be in the form of cash, traveller’s cheques, or a credit card plus a printed statement. You may also be asked for proof of accommodation and a return or onward ticket. Full details of the rule can be found on the Spanish Ministry of the Interior website.
Has anyone ever been denied entry?
The Spanish Ministry of the Interior confirmed that no British tourist has been denied entry to Spain after failing to provide evidence of funds.
It appears tourists are rarely quizzed at all. In a poll carried out by Chelsea Dickenson of cheapholidayexpert.com, 98.6 per cent of 1,373 respondents said they hadn’t been asked for evidence at passport control in Spain. Just three gave examples of being asked for proof of funds (two in Alicante, one in Madrid) – each said they were waved through when they presented a credit card.
Telegraph Travel expert Annie Bennett, who frequently flies between the UK and Spain, says she has never encountered the £97 rule being enforced and called the reports “tabloid hysteria”.
Sally Davies, The Telegraph’s Barcelona expert, says: “It’s just nonsense, all of it. Spain adores tourists and falls over itself to accommodate them.”
Is the rule new to 2024?
No. It officially came into effect for British holidaymakers when the UK left the European Union on January 1 2021. Then, the daily amount listed in the Spanish border control fine print was €100 (£83.52 at the time).
Are British tourists the only people affected?
No. The proof of funds technicality applies to any non-Schengen area citizen. But Spanish passport officers do not seem to be enforcing it on holidaymakers from further afield, either. Ken Baldwin, a director and specialist travel adviser at the travel agency Totally Spain, told The Telegraph: “It has not affected any of our clients, who come primarily from the United States and Canada. [It has] never been brought up with us.”
Is Spain the only European country enforcing this rule?
No. The requirement for tourists to provide evidence of funds applies to all Schengen area countries, not just Spain. And the cash amount varies between countries. For example, France has a similar rule requiring (possible) proof of €120 per day, Belgium’s is €95, Poland’s is €66, Germany’s is €45: the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has a note across all of its EU pages warning that you may be asked for proof of funds at border control.
Do I need to do anything about this before my holiday?
If you want to avoid any possible friction at passport control, bring printed evidence of your accommodation booking, your return flight details, plus a recent credit card statement along with the card itself – or cash, although travelling with large quantities of cash comes with obvious risks. If you do not do the above, rest assured there is currently no precedent that you would be turned around at Spanish (or any EU nation’s) passport control for not having sufficient funds, and proof of accommodation and return flight details should be easily accessed in your emails, if required.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/spain/spains-tourist-tax-hoax-spanish-government/
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/popular-kent-seaside-resorts-could-introduce-tourist-taxes-as-council-considers-move-to-recoup-costs-190022843.html
Drug shortages, now normal in UK, made worse by Brexit, report warns
Some shortages are so serious they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses say
Drug shortages, now normal in UK, made worse by Brexit, report warns
Some shortages are so serious they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses say
Drug shortages are a “new normal” in the UK and are being exacerbated by Brexit, a report by the Nuffield Trust health thinktank has warned. A dramatic recent spike in the number of drugs that are unavailable has created serious problems for doctors, pharmacists, the NHS and patients, it found.
The number of warnings drug companies have issued about impending supply problems for certain products has more than doubled from 648 in 2020 to 1,634 last year.
Mark Dayan, the report’s lead author and the Nuffield Trust’s Brexit programme lead, said: “The rise in shortages of vital medicines from rare to commonplace has been a shocking development that few would have expected a decade ago.”
The UK has been struggling since last year with major shortages of drugs to treat ADHD, type 2 diabetes and epilepsy. Three ADHD drugs that were in short supply were meant to be back in normal circulation by the end of 2023 but remain hard to obtain.
Some medicine shortages are so serious that they are imperilling the health and even lives of patients with serious illnesses, pharmacy bosses warned.
Health charities have seen a sharp rise in calls from patients unable to obtain their usual medication. Nicola Swanborough, head of external affairs at the Epilepsy Society, said: “Our helpline has been inundated with calls from desperate people who are having to travel miles, often visiting multiple pharmacies to try and access their medication.”
Paul Rees, the chief executive of the National Pharmacy Association, which represents most of the UK’s 7,000 independently owned pharmacies, said: “Supply shortages are a real and present danger to those patients who rely on life-saving medicines for their wellbeing. Pharmacy teams have seen the problems get worse in this country over recent years, putting more patients at risk.
“Pharmacists … are spending hours a day hunting down stock, yet too often have to turn patients away. It’s distressing when pharmacy teams find themselves unable to provide a prompt medicines services, through no fault of their own.”
Global manufacturing problems linked to Covid, inflation, the war in Ukraine and global instability have helped cause the UK’s unprecedented inability to ensure patients can access drugs.
But Britain’s departure from the EU in 2020 has significantly aggravated the problem, laid bare the “fragility” of the country’s medicines supply networks and could lead to the situation worsening, the report said.
“A clear picture emerged of underlying fragilities at a global and UK level, not fundamentally rooted in Brexit but exacerbated by it in some specific ways, especially through some companies removing the UK from their supply chains,” it said.
The UK’s exit from the single market has disrupted the previously smooth supply of drugs, for example through the creation of a requirement for customs checks at the border, as has Britain’s decision to leave the EU’s European Medicines Agency and start approving drugs itself. The UK is now much slower than the EU at making new drugs available, the report found.
Post-Brexit red tape has prompted some firms to stop supplying to the UK altogether.
The fact that the fall in sterling’s value after the Brexit vote in 2016 coincided with drugs being in much shorter supply globally due to pharmaceutical firms experiencing shortages of ingredients, which drove up prices, has also played a key role in creating the shortages.
That has forced the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to agree to pay above the usual price for drugs that are scarce to try to ensure continuity of supply far more often than it used to. “Price concessions” rose tenfold from about 20 a month before 2016 to 199 a month in late 2022, and cost the NHS in England £220m in 2022-23, the thinktank found.
The report is based on Freedom of Information requests to health bodies as well as interviews and a roundtable discussion with key figures in the drugs industry, senior DHSC civil servants and European health bodies.
It warned that Brexit had created “further risks … for the UK”. The Nuffield Trust said drug shortages could get worse because the EU’s 27 countries have recently decided to act as a unified bloc to try to minimise the impact of global scarcity, which could leave supplying Britain even less of a priority for drug companies.
Dr Andrew Hill, an expert in the drugs industry at Liverpool University, said: “With this background stress on global supplies, the UK is now more vulnerable to drug shortages. The UK is now stuck behind the US and Europe in the queue for essential drugs. Other countries offer high prices and easier access, with simpler regulations for supply.”
Ministers should agree to pay more for generic medicines, which are usually much cheaper than branded ones, to help tackle shortages, Hill added.
The Royal Pharmaceutical Society, which represents pharmacists, urged ministers to amend the law to allow community pharmacists to circumvent shortages by giving patients slightly different prescriptions, as their counterparts in hospitals already do.
“At present, if a liquid version of a medicine is available but tablets have been prescribed and are out of stock, the pharmacist cannot provide the liquid version,” said James Davies, the society’s director for England. “The patient has no choice but to return to the prescriber for a new prescription, which causes unnecessary workload for GPs and delay for the patient.”
DHSC said most drugs remained available. “Concessionary prices can arise for various reasons and cannot be linked to shortages,” a DHSC spokesperson said.
“Our priority is to ensure patients continue to get the treatments they need. There are around 14,000 licensed medicines and the overwhelming majority are in good supply.”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/apr/18/drug-shortages-normal-in-uk-made-worse-by-brexit-report-warns
It is down to the realisation and understanding that these drugs in injectable form are huge appetite suppressants and are therefore wanted in bulk by the "slimming industry".
Both are readily available online and easy to obtain. This is because the slimming clinics and weight loss companies order massive amounts in bulk, way more than the penny pinching NHS and let's be honest if you're a big pharma corporation who are you going to sell to.
It's yet another example of the ready made excuse of Brexit being used to hide the inadequacies of Government purchasing departments.
I accept that other drugs may be in short supply due to issues relating to Brexit but the lack of these Diabeties drugs is down to the greed of the industry to make massive profits out of idle, overweight people wanting a quick fix instead of dieting properly. Eat less + Move more = weight loss.
My wife has had her Ozempic injection changed for a less effective orally administered drug due to "Supply difficulties", yet at a local gym I can get a 28 day injectable course for £56 which is equivalent to £2 per day.
Oh and before you ask why the press don't really expose this, where do you think these clinics and online therapies advertise.