European Union

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is facing growing criticism from some European leaders as European Union interior ministers meet to discuss last week’s mass crossing into the Spanish territory of Ceuta, an episode that has reignited debate over migration across the bloc.

Human rights groups and activists, meanwhile, have accused far-right politicians of exploiting the crisis to advance anti-immigration narratives.

More than 60,000 people crossed into the North African enclave on Thursday and Friday, triggering a humanitarian emergency and prompting Spain to deploy additional military and police forces.

More than 80 migrants died, according to Spanish and Moroccan authorities, including some who drowned or were crushed while attempting to cross a breakwater barrier.

Most of those who entered have since returned to Morocco. By Saturday, “almost all” had left and the situation in Ceuta had largely returned to normal, Spanish Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska said.

Ireland, which holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union, convened an emergency video meeting of EU interior ministers after 22 of the bloc’s 27 member states called for “coordinated action and the strengthening of external borders”.

Political fault lines

The events in Ceuta have once again exposed divisions within the EU over migration policy, with several governments calling for a tougher approach while others have urged adherence to humanitarian and international legal obligations.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni was among Sanchez’s sharpest critics, announcing that Italy would introduce temporary air and sea border controls with Spain while questioning Madrid’s handling of the situation.

Sanchez rejected the criticism, saying Italy’s position was “contrary to European law, humanitarian law, and the principles of solidarity that bind us together”.

In a post on X, he also noted that Italy had received significantly more migrants than Spain since 2021, saying Italy had recorded about 478,000 arrivals compared with Spain’s 234,000.

The political debate has unfolded despite a broader decline in irregular migration to the EU. According to the EU’s border agency Frontex, irregular border crossings peaked at 1.8 million in 2015. During the first half of 2026, crossings fell by 37 percent compared with the same period last year to about 49,000.

The scenes in Ceuta have nevertheless become a focal point in wider political debates over migration, despite the EU already introducing stricter migration and asylum rules that expand member states’ powers to detain migrants and return them to designated “safe countries” or facilities outside the bloc.

Human rights organisations have criticised the measures, warning they could leave asylum seekers stranded for prolonged periods in offshore detention centres, while illegal police pushbacks at borders still regularly occur in both the EU and North Africa.

Spain defends its response

The Spanish government has rejected accusations that it mishandled the crisis, saying the situation was brought under control quickly in close coordination with Morocco despite limited assistance from other European countries.

Officials have also said that a recent ruling by Spain’s Supreme Court, which found that migrants arriving by sea cannot be summarily returned without due process, was deliberately misrepresented by smuggling networks to encourage people to attempt the crossing.

A senior Moroccan official, speaking anonymously to the AFP news agency, said Rabat had raised concerns with Spanish authorities after discussions on social media about the court ruling began in late July.

“We discussed this ruling and its impact. We explained that this ruling was going to create a problem. And it did create a problem,” the official said.

He rejected suggestions that the mass movement into Ceuta reflected a failure by Morocco’s security forces.

“It’s simplistic to say that Morocco should just have used force to stop them. That is to completely misunderstand this phenomenon,” he said.

Spain’s two tiny enclaves on the north coast of Africa have long been a flashpoint in its relationship with Morocco, which the territories border.

The only such European territories on African soil, they include the autonomous city enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, as well as Plazas de Soberanía – a group of rocky islands off the Moroccan coast, which include the Chafarinas Islands, Alhucemas Islands and Penon de Velez de la Gomera.

While Spain says it owns these enclaves, Morocco does not recognise Spain’s sovereignty over them and has been demanding their return since independence from France in 1956.

The territorial dispute has resulted in long-standing political tensions between Spain and Morocco.

Last week, after more than 50,000 migrants surged over the border into the Spanish enclave of Ceuta, those tensions between Madrid and Rabat intensified. While most have since returned to Morocco, several thousand remain in Ceuta this week.

So why does Spain have these territories at all and what does their future hold?

Here’s what we know:

Why does Spain have enclaves in North Africa?

The enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, along with a few islets off the coast of Morocco, constitute the last vestiges of the Spanish colonial empire.

Ceuta first came under Portuguese rule in 1415 before becoming part of Spain in 1580, while Melilla was conquered by a Spanish nobleman in 1497. Ceuta remained under Spanish control after Portugal regained independence in 1640 following a long war.

“Spain reached its greatest extent in Latin America, and with the loss of Cuba, Costa Rica and the Philippines in 1898, it shifted its influence to Africa, although most European colonial powers had already divided it among themselves,” explained Yolanda Aixelà Cabré, an anthropologist at IMF-CSIC in Barcelona.

After the decolonisation of Africa in the last century, Ceuta and Melilla remained the only European-held territories on the African mainland. Although geographically in Africa, the enclaves are considered Spanish territory and form part of the EU’s external border.

“For Spain, maintaining these enclaves [on the northern coast of Africa] is fundamental on a symbolic level because they reinforce Spanish grandeur, its imperial past which the State continues to consider a bearer of civilisation in contrast to barbarism, a notion perfectly encapsulated by the repetitive discourse that [Christopher] Columbus, representing the Catholic Monarchs, ‘discovered’ America,” she said.

Why didn’t the enclaves pass to Morocco on independence?

Selim Balouati Lakhloufi is a historian and researcher specialising in the history of North Africa and the Rif mountainous region in northern Morocco, which stretches along the Mediterranean coast from Tangier to the border with Algeria. He said Ceuta and Melilla continue to exist as separate territories because their origins “predate modern Morocco”.

“They are enclaves that have been occupied for centuries,” he told Al Jazeera.

But since gaining independence from France in 1956 – which Spain recognised while retaining its enclaves – Morocco has consistently maintained that the territories of Ceuta and Melilla, which it calls “Sebtah and Melilah”, and the Plazas de Soberanía, are part of its territory and has been demanding their return.

“This has always been used by the Moroccan political class as a point of criticism against Spain,” Lakhloufi said.

Samir Bennis, a Washington, DC-based senior political adviser who is also the co-founder of Morocco World News and an expert on Morocco’s foreign policy, said since independence, Morocco’s territorial claims over Ceuta and Melilla have frequently been at the centre of tricky relations between Spain and Morocco.

“Perhaps this issue would not have had the same detrimental effect on bilateral relations had Moroccan leaders shown greater determination in the early 1960s, during the height of the decolonisation period, to bring the matter before the United Nations and seek recognition of these two cities as colonial territories that should be liberated from any foreign presence,” he said.

He explained that there are, however, two important factors which led the Moroccan authorities to refrain from pursuing this course in their efforts to restore the country’s territorial integrity.

“The first was the sheer scale of the territorial disputes between Spain and Morocco. Given the difficulty Morocco faced in simultaneously contesting Spanish control over several territories, the Moroccan government decided to proceed gradually in its efforts to recover the parts of Moroccan territory that remained under Spanish rule.”

“The second factor that led the Moroccan leadership to postpone addressing the question of Ceuta and Melilla was the willingness shown by the Spanish authorities to resolve their territorial disputes with Morocco progressively. In the end, this strategy proved highly beneficial for safeguarding Spain’s interests in the two cities,” Bennis added.

How strong is Morocco’s claim to these enclaves?

Morocco’s claim to the territories is relatively weak, Bennis said. But “the country can invoke a range of historical, geographical and human arguments that cast doubt on Spain’s position”.

Jamie Trinidad, a fellow and director of studies in law at Wolfson College, Cambridge University, also said that Morocco’s claim to the territories is weak under international law. “It is a political, rather than a legal, claim, similar to Spain’s claim to Gibraltar, which lies across the strait from Ceuta,” he said. Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory.

“In the 1970s, Morocco asked the UN to include the territories on the list of ‘Non-Self-Governing Territories’ overseen by the UN’s Special Committee on Decolonisation, but the Moroccan request was ignored by the UN,” he added.

What do people living in these enclaves want?

Around 84,000 people live in Ceuta and 86,000 in Melilla.

In Spanish possession since 1580, Ceuta is home to a mixed population of Christian and Muslim, Spanish and Moroccan residents and day workers who live and work in relative harmony.

But after more than 50,000 migrants entered Ceuta illegally last week, divisions and tensions in the enclave have risen.

Hundreds of residents rallied on Sunday – two days after the surge of migrants to Ceuta – to oppose a planned far-right anti-migrant rally, forcing organisers to cancel the event.

“I am half Christian, half Muslim, as many in Ceuta are. We live peacefully together. But the numbers this time were scary,” Ceuta resident Isabel told Al Jazeera over the weekend.

Melilla, which has been in Spanish possession since 1497, is also home to Spanish and Moroccan residents, as well as small Jewish and Sindhi communities, the latter a diaspora of Hindu merchants who arrived following the 1947 partition of India.

The Plazas de Soberania is mainly populated by Spanish military personnel.

Lakhloufi noted that polling shows an overwhelming majority of people living in Ceuta and Melilla wish to remain part of Spain.

“This has been reflected consistently in public opinion and in the absence of any significant political movement advocating a change in sovereignty,” he said. “Even the population with Moroccan origin want to stay as Spanish and European. This is because the social welfare difference between Morocco and the cities it’s really high,” he said.

“At the same time, both cities maintain strong historical, cultural and economic ties with Morocco, making cooperation across the border an important aspect of daily life,” he added.

According to the Spanish government, Ceuta and Melilla are part of the Schengen area, which guarantees freedom of movement within the EU, but are subject to a special Schengen regime. People travelling between the enclaves and mainland Spain undergo separate border checks.

“Schengen checks are carried out on exit by sea or air, the only two routes available. Therefore, no one can travel from Ceuta or Melilla to mainland Spain without being identified by the National Police at the port or the airport. In addition, ferry operators and airlines are required to verify travel documents,” a Spanish government document states.

Will Spain give up these enclaves?

Analysts are divided.

In March 2022, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez wrote to the Moroccan king, confirming Spanish support for Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara, which Spain gave up control of in 1975. Sanchez said this was “the most serious, realistic and credible” initiative for resolving the decades-long dispute over the vast African territory and declared “a new stage” in Spain’s strained relations with Morocco.

Cabre said, therefore, that after last week’s overwhelming migrant influx into Ceuta, Spain could ultimately cede sovereignty to Morocco.

“Their [the enclaves] mere presence is an unsustainable historical anomaly at a time when the decolonisation of European states is being promoted at all levels, like European countries returning of items stolen during colonialism and recognising the citizenship rights of their former colonies,” she said.

But Lakhloufi does not expect a fundamental change in Spain’s policy on the enclaves.

“What may change is the way Spain manages its relationship with Morocco, particularly regarding border management, migration and security cooperation. However, tactical adjustments should not be confused with a shift in Spain’s long-standing position on sovereignty. It’s usually Morocco that puts pressure on the borders, not Spain,” he said.

Images of migrants from Morocco streaming into the Spanish territory of Ceuta in North Africa have again thrust the immigration debate into the spotlight in Europe and elsewhere.

Despite the sea barrier separating Ceuta and mainland Europe, some EU countries have announced controls at their borders with Spain.

Italy has suspended Schengen rules allowing border-free travel.

US President Donald Trump has also weighed in, attempting to tie the brief migrant surge in Ceuta to the US midterm elections in November.

But why did the influx happen now, and what does it mean for Spain’s relatively migrant-friendly policy as it faces hostility from large parts of Europe?

Presenter: Anna Burns-Francis

Guests:

Anna Terron Cusi – Spain’s former secretary of state for immigration and emigration, who is now a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute

Daniel Gros – Director of the Institute for European Policymaking at Bocconi University and an adviser to the EU parliament

Deborah Fleischaker – Former acting chief of staff at US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who is now a senior adviser for immigration policy and strategy at UnidosUS

Spain says the crisis in its North African enclave Ceuta is back under control, with most of the more than 50,000 migrants who stormed across its borders over recent days choosing to voluntarily go back to Morocco.

Tens of thousands of people crossed into Ceuta on Thursday and continued arriving overnight into Friday.

Most came by sea, swimming or in small boats, to get around the border fence. Some rushed border crossing points in such numbers that the guards were overwhelmed. Others tried to climb the breakwater that holds the border fence. At least 67 people died trying to reach Ceuta.

Many questions remain about what caused such a huge number of people to abruptly seek to illegally enter Spanish territory. It was clearly not a coincidence they all chose the same day to do so. Was it coordinated and planned in advance, and if so, by whom and for what purpose?

Here’s what we know:

Where is Ceuta and why is it significant?

Ceuta is an autonomous Spanish city on the northern coast of Africa bordering Morocco. Along with Melilla, it is one of the only two land borders between the European Union and Africa.

It first came under Portuguese rule in 1415 before becoming part of Spain in 1580. It remained under Spanish sovereignty after Portugal regained independence in 1640. After the decolonisation of Africa, Ceuta and Melilla are the only remaining European-held territories on the African mainland.

Its location has made it one of the main entry points for migrants and asylum seekers trying to reach Europe. The enclave is protected by high border fences, surveillance systems, and a permanent deployment of Spain’s Civil Guard and National Police.

What caused the sudden massive influx?

Authorities in Ceuta linked the surge in attempted crossings to a Spanish Supreme Court ruling published in July that barred authorities from immediately returning migrants who arrive by sea. The ruling does not apply to migrants who enter Spain by land, including by climbing over the border fence.

But several experts have questioned this theory, saying few migrants would have been aware of the court ruling.

Ignacio Cembrero, a Spanish journalist specialised in migration in North Africa, told the news agency AFP that “without a doubt, the July 8 ruling has played a role… but that doesn’t explain the level of mobilisation.”

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez blamed the sudden influx on human trafficking mafias who exaggerated the significance of the court ruling to convince vast numbers of migrants to take part in a mass coordinated surge into Ceuta.

Some believe that Morocco may have had a role in organising and facilitating the sudden mass breach of the border.

Morocco does not recognise Madrid’s sovereignty over the centuries-old Spanish enclaves Ceuta and Melilla, regarding them as occupied territory.

Morocco also stridently asserts its own sovereignty over Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony it annexed in 1975 where the Indigenous inhabitants, represented by the Polisario Front, oppose rule from Rabat and want independence.

In April 2021, Madrid allowed Polisario Front leader Brahim Ghali to be treated in a Spanish hospital for COVID-19, infuriating Morocco, which regards him as a criminal in charge of an outlawed separatist rebellion.

Morocco recalled its ambassador from Madrid, and appeared to loosen its border controls in May, allowing about 10,000 migrants to enter Ceuta as a threat to Spain.

In 2022, Spain restored full diplomatic relations with Morocco after reversing its four-decade policy of supporting self-determination for the Indigenous people of Western Sahara and instead backing Moroccan sovereignty. It was widely assumed that Rabat achieved this goal by leveraging the vulnerability of the Spanish enclaves.

Last month, relations between Madrid and Rabat soured again because Sanchez made an official visit to Algeria – a country Morocco regards as a bitter enemy because of its unwavering support for the Polisario Front.

Some are speculating that the latest events in Ceuta show Morocco once again sending a warning to Spain.

What does this have to do with Israel?

Some observers believe that if Morocco did orchestrate the mayhem, it may have been encouraged by others, pointing at two leaders with a particular grudge against Sanchez – US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Sanchez is one of Europe’s most consistently pro-Palestinian voices. He has explicitly said Israel’s war on Gaza is genocide, has been highly critical of the US-Israel war on Iran, and refused to allow jointly operated US-Spanish military facilities to be used to facilitate that war.

Trump has been scathing about Spain because of its refusal to spend a greater share of gross domestic product to match the NATO target.

Morocco has been far friendlier than Spain to Israel. In 2024, Spain refused to allow a US-flagged cargo ship carrying weapons for Israel to dock at Algeciras, so the vessel redirected to Morocco instead. The same year, Moroccan authorities allowed an Israeli warship to dock at Tangier to refuel and resupply en route from the US to Israel, after Spain had refused the vessel port access.

Many Israelis consider Madrid’s support for Palestine hypocritical when Spain also occupies Arab territory.

In 2019, Netanyahu’s son Yair tweeted a map of Ceuta and Melilla, saying, “Dear Arabs and Muslims. Want to free occupied Arab Islamic lands? Here’s a good start!”

In March this year, an article written by American Enterprise Institute fellow Michael Rubin for the staunchly pro-Israel Middle East Forum urged: “Moroccans should gather, send bulldozers to the border, and then enter Ceuta and Melilla unarmed to raise the flag.”

In April, pro-Israel Moroccan analyst Amine Ayoub wrote an article for Israeli website Ynet News arguing: “US-Spain tensions over NATO, Iran create opening for Morocco to press claims on Ceuta and Melilla, with Israel positioned to back Rabat diplomatically within US-led alliance that increasingly favours cooperative partners over European holdouts.”

On Friday, with Ceuta invaded by tens of thousands of migrants, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, posted a provocative comment on X.

“Spain, which never misses an opportunity to lecture Israel, has declared a state of emergency in Ceuta following the crisis over its immigration policy,” Danon wrote. “Maybe before it continues lecturing us, it’s time it explained to the world why it still maintains colonial enclaves in Africa.”

“Well, it’s all starting to become quite clear,” commented Spain’s transport minister, Oscar Puente, apparently suggesting he thought Israel was involved in what happened in Ceuta.

Pro-Israel sentiment has been steadily on the rise in Morocco, particularly as the country’s diplomatic relationship with both Israel and the United States has been deepening.

Days ago, it was announced that Morocco named a 1,055km (655.5-mile) highway over Western Sahara after Trump.

Experts said the gesture was far from surprising, as Morocco was one of the signatories to the Trump-brokered Abraham Accords, which saw the country normalise relations with Israel in 2020. In return, the Trump administration has provided crucial support to Morocco at the United Nations and through bilateral channels, bringing Rabat closer to securing greater control over Western Sahara.

There is no evidence that Morocco orchestrated events in Ceuta partly on behalf of Israel, just a lot of interesting coincidences.

But whether or not there was any conspiracy, one consequence of the episode is clear – the already frosty relations between the left-wing Spanish government of Sanchez and the far-right Israeli government of Netanyahu are now even chillier.

While the United States enjoys sufficient energy resources, thanks to shale oil, the European Union does not. To assure itself of the energy supplies in the Gulf that the European Union needs, the EU should consider assisting the Gulf States in the construction and operations of the pipeline. 

Building a large-scale, completely underground oil pipeline system from the Persian/Arabian Gulf oil fields to the Mediterranean Sea is estimated to cost between $40 billion and $60 billion and would take 5 to 7 years to complete. The exact metrics depend heavily on the chosen route, political alignment across transit countries, and the required total throughput capacity. 

Breakdown of Total Costs 

Modern mega-pipeline engineering over long desert and mountain distances faces massive cost drivers: 

· Construction & Trenching ($18B – $25B): Burying multiple large-diameter (e.g., 42 to 48-inch) pipelines entirely underground requires extensive trenching, rock blasting, and specialized anti-corrosion coatings. Global benchmarks show that large-scale overland pipelines average $8 million to $12 million per mile, but full underground burial heavily drives up labor and machinery costs.

· Pumping Stations & Terminals ($8B – $12B): Moving millions of barrels of crude daily across hundreds of miles requires heavily fortified pumping stations every 60–100 miles, alongside massive new storage and loading terminals on the Mediterranean coast. 

· Geopolitical & Geotechnical Risk Premium ($7B – $10B): Multi-billion dollar  contingencies are standard to absorb project snags, material inflation, and  complex international legal/right-of-way frameworks. 

· Security Infrastructure ($5B – $10B): Given the vulnerability of cross-border energy corridors, modern estimates for Gulf bypass networks integrate specialized defensive technologies (like automated drone surveillance or surface-to-air missile defenses) to protect critical facilities. 

Construction Timeline and Stages 

· Megaprojects of this length are restricted by a sequential project lifecycle that cannot easily be accelerated simultaneously: 

· Diplomacy & Right-of-Way (Years 1–2): Securing cross-border transit legal treaties (e.g., routing through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, or Syria/Turkey) and finalizing environmental impact assessments. 

· Material Procurement & Logistics (Years 2–3): Manufacturing and transporting millions of tons of high-grade steel line pipe and heavy industrial pumps. 

· Civil Trenching & Laying (Years 3–6): Heavy execution phase. Crews can typically lay roughly 1 to 2 miles of pipe per day per construction spread.

Multiple spreads working simultaneously across different geographic zones are required to finish within a 3-to-4-year active construction window.  · Testing & Commissioning (Year 7): Hydrostatic pressure testing of the lines to ensure underground integrity, followed by line fill and gradual commercial scale-up 

Proposed Alternative Routes 

Producers in the region actively advance or evaluate different variants of this corridor to bypass maritime chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz: 

· The Mesopotamian Corridor (Iraq/Syria route): A ~1,500 km route linking the southern oil fields of Basra to Mediterranean ports like Baniyas, Syria.  While geographically direct, it remains vulnerable to high regional instability. 

· The Trans-Arabian Upgrades: Adapting or running parallel lines to existing corridors (like the Saudi East-West Petroline, which travels 1,200 km to the Red Sea) and extending them northward to Mediterranean Sea terminals. 

How Standard Micro-Tunneling Works for Utilities: When pipeline engineers hit a mountain or an environmental zone where they cannot dig an open trench, they use Micro-Tunnel Boring Machines (MTBMs) or Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD). These systems are highly specialized to avoid the exact problems of passenger-sized tunnels: 

· Sized to the Pipe: Unlike a 12-foot-wide transit tunnel, an MTBM is built to the exact outer diameter of the oil pipe (typically 4 to 5 feet for a 48-inch line).  This means crews excavate 90% less rock and dirt.

· Pipe-Jacking Method: Instead of laying concrete tunnel walls and then trying to slide a heavy steel pipe inside later, MTBMs use a process called “pipe jacking.” Powerful hydraulic rams at the surface push the actual steel oil pipe directly behind the drilling head as it advances into the rock. 

· No Open Voids: Because the pipeline fits perfectly into the drilled hole, there is no empty space left around it. The pipe is completely surrounded by solid rock or stabilizing grout, eliminating the risk of dangerous, explosive gas pockets building up in an open tunnel. 

The Mountain Ranges the Route Must Clear 

· To get from the Gulf fields (like Ghawar in Saudi Arabia or Basra in Iraq) to the Mediterranean, a pipeline must breach the Syrian Desert and cross a series of rugged, geologically active mountain walls running parallel to the Mediterranean coast: 

· The Jordan Rift Valley & Dead Sea Fault: Before hitting the mountains, the pipeline must drop down into one of the lowest, most seismically active valleys on Earth (falling hundreds of feet below sea level) and then immediately climb back out. 

· The Judean Hills & Golan Heights: Depending on the exact coastal terminal, the line must climb over rugged limestone ridges ranging from 3,000 to 4,000 feet high.

· The Anti-Lebanon & Mount Lebanon Ranges: If the route takes a more northern path toward Syria or Lebanon, it faces severe alpine conditions with peaks soaring between 9,000 and 10,000 feet. 

The Geopolitical Treaties Required 

Building a multi-billion dollar piece of energy infrastructure across national borders requires an intricate web of international legal frameworks. Historically, cross-border pipelines are governed by Host Government Agreements (HGAs) and Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs). 

To make a Gulf-to-Mediterranean pipeline a reality, several unprecedented breakthroughs would be needed: 

· Transit Fees and Tariffs: The countries hosting the pipeline but not producing the oil (like Jordan or Syria) must negotiate “transit fees.” These are typically paid in cents per barrel of oil that passes through their territory, providing them with billions in long-term revenue. 

To make a Gulf-to-Mediterranean pipeline a reality, several unprecedented breakthroughs would be needed: 

· Transit Fees and Tariffs: The countries hosting the pipeline but not producing the oil (like Jordan or Syria) must negotiate “transit fees.” These are typically paid in cents per barrel of oil that passes through their territory, providing them with billions in long-term revenue. 

· The “Right of Way” Guarantee: Sovereign nations must sign legally binding treaties promising that they will not shut off or seize the pipeline during diplomatic disputes. A famous historical warning is the original Trans-Arabian Pipeline (Tapline), which was repeatedly disrupted, sabotaged, and eventually shut down permanently due to border conflicts and transit fee arguments between Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. 

· The Abraham Accords Framework: If the pipeline takes the most geologically direct southern route to terminals in Israel (like Ashkelon or Haifa), it relies heavily on the long-term stability and expansion of the Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia and Israel would need formalized economic treaties to protect a joint energy corridor from regional political shifts. 

· Joint Security Commands: Because a pipeline stretching thousands of miles across the Middle East is a prime target for non-state actors and drone strikes, treaties must establish a unified security framework. This allows military and intelligence sharing across borders to patrol the pipeline corridor with automated drone networks and satellite monitoring. 

Environmental Safeguards for Freshwater Aquifers The Jordan Valley and the surrounding mountain ridges contain critical freshwater sources, such as the Mountain Aquifer, which supply drinking water to millions of people in Israel, Palestine, and Jordan. A single major crude oil leak could seep into the porous limestone and permanently poison these non-renewable water reserves.  To mitigate this, engineers deploy an array of specialized defenses: 

· Pipe-in-Pipe Technology (Double Containment): In high-consequence water zones, crews do not use a standard single-wall pipe. They build a “pipe-in-pipe” system where the main 48-inch crude oil line sits inside a larger, secondary outer steel casing. The vacuum gap between the two pipes is monitored 24/7 for pressure changes; if the inner pipe leaks, the outer pipe captures the oil before it touches the soil. 

· Fiber-Optic Acoustic Leak Detection: Continuous fiber-optic cables are buried directly alongside the pipeline. These cables can “hear” the micro-acoustic vibrations and sudden temperature drops caused by a pinhole leak. This allows operators to pinpoint the exact location of a breach within meters in less than a minute. 

· Emergency Remote Isolation Valves: The pipeline is segmented by heavy-duty, automated shut-off valves. In flat areas, these are placed every 20 miles. In critical aquifer zones or steep mountain drops, they are placed every 1 to 2 miles. If the control center detects a pressure drop, these valves slam shut automatically via satellite command to trap the oil inside a small, isolated section, preventing millions of gallons from draining into the environment. 

Daily Revenue for Transit Countries 

· Transit countries like Jordan or Syria do not own the oil, but they make massive profits simply by letting it cross their land. These fees are negotiated as a tariff—a fixed dollar amount charged per barrel of oil moved. 

· Assuming a modern mega-pipeline with a capacity of 2 million barrels per day (bpd) and a standard international transit tariff of $0.60 to $1.20 per barrel, we can calculate the massive financial impact on a host country’s budget:

DAILY TRANSIT REVENUE ESTIMATE │ 

Pipeline Throughput Capacity │ 2,000,000 Barrels / Day 

Average transit tariff rate: $0.90 USD per barrel 

Daily Revenue Generated │ $1,800,000 USD / Day 

Annual Revenue Generated │ $657,000,000 USD / Year 

The Broader Economic Impact 

· Direct Budget Injection: For a developing economy like Jordan, an extra $650M+ per year in pure cash represents a massive boost to their national budget, easily funding large-scale public infrastructure or health programs. 

· In-Kind Energy Off-Takes: Rather than taking 100% of the payment in cash, transit treaties often allow host countries to take a portion of the payment in free crude oil. This allows them to supply their local refineries and secure cheap domestic gasoline without relying on volatile global energy imports. 

· Long-Term Economic Leverage: Hosting the pipeline transforms these non-producing nations into critical gatekeepers for global energy markets, giving them significant diplomatic leverage when negotiating trade and security deals with major global superpowers. 

Maritime Shipping Insurance & The Strait of Hormuz Bypass  The Strait of Hormuz is the world’s most sensitive maritime energy chokepoint. During periods of regional conflict, Lloyd’s of London and global marine underwriters designate

the Persian Gulf as a listed area (high-risk zone), triggering drastic shifts in shipping economics. 

· War Risk Premiums: When regional tensions spike, war risk insurance premiums for oil tankers navigating the Strait can surge from a baseline of 0.025% of the ship’s value to over 0.25% to 0.5% per voyage. For a modern $100 million Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC), this adds an extra $250,000 to $500,000 in insurance costs for a single transit. 

· Bypassing the Chokepoint: Moving oil via the underground pipeline directly to the Mediterranean entirely eliminates the need for tankers to enter the Persian Gulf. Tankers load at secure Mediterranean ports (like Ashkelon, Haifa, or Baniyas) within standard, lower-risk European maritime zones. 

· Shipping Time Savings: Loading in the Mediterranean slashes the sailing distance to European and North American refineries by roughly 3,500 to 4,500 miles compared to sailing all the way around Africa or paying steep transit fees to use the Suez Canal. This reduces freight operating costs and completely erases the risk of a regional conflict stranding a fleet inside the Gulf. 

Naval Defense Infrastructure at the Mediterranean Terminal 

Because the new Mediterranean pipeline terminal would handle up to 2 million barrels of oil per day, it becomes a high-value strategic asset. Protecting it requires a multi-layered naval defense perimeter extending miles out to sea:

· Anti-Drone & Anti-Torpedo Netting: Heavy, underwater physical barriers and sensor nets are deployed around the loading buoys and piers to catch or detonate incoming unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) or loitering aquatic explosive drones. 

· Phalanx CIWS & Missile Batteries: The onshore terminal facility integrates close-in weapon systems (CIWS) and surface-to-air missile batteries (like Iron Dome or Barak MX systems) to intercept incoming rocket, drone, or anti-ship missile strikes launched from sea or land. 

· Active Naval Patrols: Host nations deploy continuous maritime security cordons using fast attack craft, sonar-equipped corvettes, and aerial reconnaissance drones to enforce a strict 5-to-10 mile exclusion zone around the offshore loading terminals, vetting every incoming commercial vessel. 

Conclusions 

With political tensions between the United States and the European Union increasing and confidence in the United States’ foreign policy falling, Europe needs to find and secure an energy source that is not dependent on either the United States or Russia.  An agreement, both economic and political, would in the long run make Europe independent from energy sources from either country. The idea of an overland pipeline to the Mediterranean is both economically and engineeringly possible. What is needed is the political will to make it happen.

More than 1,500 migrants have reached Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta by sea over the past week, many swimming from Morocco using wetsuits and inflatables. Local authorities say reception centres are overwhelmed and have called for an emergency response.

Both countries expect to see temperatures soar into Wednesday, which could cause the blazes to spread.

The spread of wildfires in France and Spain that had come dangerously close to the cities of Bordeaux and Madrid appears to be slowing, authorities say, but they are bracing for yet another stifling heatwave this week, which could fan the flames of current blazes and ignite new ones.

Nearly 4,000 people were evacuated from tourist sites in the Lacanau area of the Gironde region in southwestern France on Tuesday, bringing the total number who have fled Gironde to well over a quarter of a million. The wine-growing region, which includes the historic city of Bordeaux is the worst affected in France by the wildfires

“We are at a point of fragility,” Eric Brocardi, spokesperson for France’s national firefighters federation, told BFMTV on Tuesday. “We will continue attacking this fire despite the forecast rise in temperatures.”

Images posted by the French newspaper Le Figaro showed ash on a beach in Lacanau. Sophie Brocas, Gironde’s prefect, has banned all sporting and cultural events until August 8.

France’s fourth heatwave of 2026 is expected to begin on Tuesday as temperatures are forecast to reach as high as 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) in the coming days. When the heatwave reaches Spain on Wednesday, temperatures are expected to be even hotter there.

In Spain, 116,000 people have had to leave their homes since the wildfires began, but some have since been able to return. In the central province of Toledo, people from nine of 11 evacuated towns were allowed to go back to their homes on Tuesday.

Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska said people “can be a little more at ease” after progress overnight in tackling the many blazes in the country, which are mostly concentrated in central Spain.

Firefighters are also dealing with blazes in the neighbouring provinces of Avila and Toledo. About 800sq km (310sq miles) of land have burned.

One Spanish evacuee from the east of the country told the Reuters news agency he had witnessed “total chaos”.

“It was like in the movies where hell cracked the ground open, and you see the red hell.”

The scorching heat has renewed concerns about climate change with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez describing the fires as “the most painful expression of a climate emergency”.

Sanchez said authorities are beginning “to see the light at the end of the tunnel in the fight against wildfires” but cautioned that the upcoming heatwave still has to be dealt with.

The change has just come into place for the peninsula, and Brits flying to the area will need to make sure their travel documents meet the new requirements, or could find themselves stranded at the airport

Budget airline easyJet has issued a warning to Brits flying on any of its four routes from the UK to a popular holiday hotspot visited by approximately 1.3million Brits every year, as new entry requirements came into force earlier this month.

In a statement, easyJet said: “From 15 July 2026, Gibraltar will align with Schengen entry requirements. If you’re travelling to Gibraltar, please check that your travel documents meet the new rules before you fly.”

The airline operates four routes from the UK to Gibraltar International Airport from Birmingham, Bristol, London-Gatwick, and Manchester. The only other airline that operates from the hub is British Airways, which has a London-Heathrow service.

The airline set out the key changes, saying: “UK visas and UK residence permits/share codes will no longer be accepted for entry to Gibraltar.” It also clarified: “Passports for travellers from non-Schengen countries (except Ireland and Cyprus) must have been issued within the last 10 years, and be valid for at least 3 months after the date you plan to leave Gibraltar.”

The requirements are now aligned with what Brits can expect at the other 29 countries in the Schengen area. This means they’ll need to go through registration under the Entry/Exit System (EES). EasyJet added: “Before travelling, please make sure you have the correct documents for your journey to avoid any issues at the airport, you can check the government website.”

While Gibraltar remains a a self-governing British Overseas Territory, as of July 15 a post-Brexit deal has allowed the border with Spain to be removed, getting rid of border controls and customs checks for those passing between Spain and Gibraltar.

Historically, the border has caused hold-ups and long queues for locals as it has had to handle an average of 15,000 people passing through it each day for work, education, and social purposes.

But the change means that, while Gibraltar still has autonomy, it’s now a de facto part of the Schengen free-movement area, which is why Brits will notice a change when visiting the territory. The EES system will involve the same fingerprint and face scans as the EU requires at every airport.

The FCDO added: “On arrival at Joshua Hassan Gibraltar International Airport, you should expect two sets of checks which will satisfy entry into Gibraltar and the Schengen Area: Gibraltar entry immigration controls performed by the Gibraltar authorities and Schengen entry immigration controls performed by the Spanish authorities as the authorities of the neighbouring Schengen State

“This includes registration under the Entry/Exit System (EES) where it applies. The European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) will also apply once it is operational. Once you have cleared these checks, you can move freely across the land border from Gibraltar into Spain and the wider Schengen Area.”

Have a story you want to share? Email us at webtravel@reachplc.com

AS many as one million Brits could have invalid passports – which could see them banned from boarding their flight at the airport this summer.

New research conducted by Compare the Market has found that hundreds of thousands of passports are falling foul of two major rules.

The research analysed HM Passport Office Data in June 2026.

One of the more common mistakes is passports not having at least three months left on them.

This is required for more European countries like France and Spain, and the study found that as many as 705,904 passports in the UK don’t follow these guidelines.

Some countries require even more than this – Turkey need 150 days and Egypt needs six months – so Brits need to check how long they have left after the expiry date before booking a holiday.

NO SHARM NO FOUL

Egypt passport rule to be aware of after family banned from flight

PASS IT ON

Turkey passport rule Brits need to know about or risk being BANNED from flight

This recently caught out one family who were forced to miss their ‘dream holiday’ to Egypt because one of their passports had less than six months left on it.

Another rule that holidaymakers are still breaking is the 10-year rule, which no longer allows passports to be more than this.

Pre-Brexit rules allowed passports to carry over 10 months from the previous document, meaning passports could be 10 years and 10 months.

But those extra 10 months are no longer seen as valid, and it is thought that as many as 347,268 passports could be out of date due to this.

Anyone with a burgundy passport, issued before September 2018, are affected by this.

This has affected a number of families already this year, including one who were forced to miss her 50th birthday abroad and was lest £900 out of pocket.

Tim Knighton, travel insurance expert at Compare the Market, said: “Many travellers assume if they have a valid passport they can travel overseas without any issues, but that’s not always the case. 

“Some countries, including many popular European destinations, require several months’ validity extending beyond the length of a trip, so it’s important to check the entry requirements for each destination before travelling.

“With more than 700,000 UK passports now having less than three months’ validity remaining, it’s worth travellers taking a few minutes to check theirs before heading abroad.”

The study also warned of the risk of passports being stolen or lost, with more than 422,000 reported this last year. This works out to more than 1,100 a day.

He added: “While some travel insurance policies will cover lost and stolen passports, there are specific conditions and policies vary so it’s always worth comparing different deals and checking details of your cover to ensure you get the right level of protection for your circumstances.”

If your passport is lost abroad, you will need to apply for an emergency one at the British embassy in that country. Here are some other passport rules you need to be aware of this summer to avoid holiday chaos.

Passport Rules

Everything you need to know about passports

Passengers have been issued a stark message about being caught up in airport delays

Peak travel season is here, with many Brits jetting off on their summer holidays. Thousands of holidaymakers are flocking abroad over the next few weeks.

However, this year things are looking very different if you are travelling to Europe. The new EU Entry/Exit System (ESS) was fully implemented in April, resulting in significant travel disruptions that are still continuing at many airports.

Brits have found themselves in queues lasting hours as they try to pass through the digital border system. It has even seen some travellers missing their flights, leaving their holidays in tatters.

The system is used at airport arrivals and departures in the EU and the Schengen area. Travellers have been urged to get to airports even earlier than usual so they aren’t caught up in queues, especially when returning to the UK.

Now, Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary has issued a stark message to anyone flying on his airline this summer. He has admitted the airline will not wait for anyone stuck in queues, and that the flight will carry on as scheduled.

While on the Telegraph’s Travel Expert podcast, host Simon Calder asked: “If I were a passenger, say at Milan Bergamo Airport, and was stuck in a mile-long queue, how long are you going to be waiting for me? And if you can’t wait for me, what are you going to do?”

Mr O’Leary replied: “Nothing. We will not wait for anybody. If you are stuck, if you are not at the boarding gate when we finish boarding, the plane is going without you.

“We are not delaying our flights for people who are stuck in passport control queues. They have to show up at the airport earlier, but they have to be at the boarding gate; otherwise, they are not flying.”

Travel expert Simon previously branded the entry and exit system a “Euro shambles”. He named Milan Malpensa, Lisbon, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt and Copenhagen as the airports with the “worst” delays.

Simon previously said on the podcast: “From what I have experienced, and certainly one of them is Milan Malpensa. The fingerprint stuff took an hour, and I was the first one off the EasyJet plane from Gatwick.

“Then, I went through the other terminal to check out and it took 45 minutes that time but they wanted those fingerprints again, which is absolutely not in the rules.”

He added: “I have heard terrible stories from Lisbon, other places frequently mentioned, Paris Charles de Gaulle and Frankfurt.

“Both of them are huge hubs where you have got a lot of people flying from various regional airports across the UK into Paris and Frankfurt to connect.

“That’s okay if you are going intercontinental but if you are trying to connect to somewhere in Europe it is awful.”

Need to know

Ryanair is targeting passengers who use large rucksacks or wheelie bags that exceed their free under-seat allowance. If you do not purchase ‘Priority Boarding’, your bag must fit under the seat in front of you (max 40x 30 x 20 cm)

All you need to know about Ryanair’s £79.99 hand luggage charge update

1. The £79.99 hand luggage charge, which has been causing a stir online, is a new baggage enforcement crackdown by Ryanair directly colliding with landmark new EU flight rules that aim to ban carry-on fees entirely.
2. Ryanair is targeting passengers who use large rucksacks or wheelie bags that exceed their free under-seat allowance. If you do not purchase ‘Priority Boarding’, your bag must fit under the seat in front of you (max 40 x 30 x20 cm). If it does not fit in the sizing gate, you will face an airport gate bag fee.
3. While standard pre-booked cabin bags cost between £6 and £36, being caught at the gate triggers a post-booking penalty that can reach up to £75 to £80.99 to put the bag in the aircraft hold.
4. Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary has doubled down on checking oversized bags. Ground handling crew bonuses for finding non-compliant bags are increasing, and the monthly bonus cap has been entirely removed to catch passengers “scamming the system”.
5. This enforcement push comes right as the European Parliament passed an air passenger rights update. New EU legislation will make it mandatory to include one overhead cabin bag and one personal item in the basic advertised airfare, eliminating hidden luggage fees. Airlines, search portals, and travel agents must display the full ticket price inclusive of hand luggage from the very beginning of the booking process.
6. O’Leary has furiously criticised the European Union‘s move. O’Leary claims the EU has “miss-sold” the regulations and that bundling overhead bags will make European airlines look less competitive globally. Ryanair warns that banning separate cabin bag fees will simply force base ticket prices up across the board, making travel more expensive for people who prefer to fly light.
7. The current cabin bag rules and gate fees remain fully in force. The new EU rules are a confirmed proposal expected to transition into law next year. Until the official transition period concludes, you will still be charged at the gate if your luggage exceeds the strict sizer dimensions.

READ MORE: Ryanair CEO says airports shouldn’t serve booze until 12pm to stop ‘misbehaviour’

The budget airline has confirmed it’ll be cutting the number of aircraft from one of its city bases by five, and its schedule will have two million fewer seats to a popular city break destination as of winter 2026

Ryanair has slashed the number of seats from its schedule for a city break destination that’s famous for its Christmas market and historic sites, as well as being a major business hub.

The decision was made in response to the country’s decision to raise aviation taxes, with Ryanair releasing a strongly-worded statement to announce they would be cutting two million seats from two of the capital’s airports.

The Federal Government of Belgium announced plans to raise the country’s aviation tax from €5 (about £4.20) to €7 (about £6) as of January 2027. This was erroneously described by Ryanair in a statement as a “250% increase since 2025.”

As a result, the budget carrier plans to cut five aircraft from its base at Brussels South Charleroi Airport, and reduce capacity by two million seats overall from Belgium’s Charleroi and Zaventem airports. The reductions will be applied to the winter 2026 and summer 2027 schedule.

Brussels is not the first destination to see a cut in the number of Ryanair seats this year. Earlier this year it announced reductions in services to Spain and Portugal, with smaller regional airports the most affected.

Valladolid and Jerez saw cuts to their services, while scrapped routes included Asturias and Vigo. A service to Tenerife North was also scrapped as a result of a dispute over airport fee hikes, leaving the airport with no alternative direct UK routes. Ryanair also closed its two aircraft base at Santiago de Compostela which reduced capacity.

As a result over one million seats were taken from the winter 2025 routes, and 1.2 million cut from the summer 2026 schedule. Another cut was to a Portugal service, with Ryanair cutting six routes to and from the Azores, an emerging tourist destination. It was estimated the cuts affected around 400,000 passengers.

At the time, Ryanair blamed this cutback on growing airport charges set by Portuguese authorities and environmental taxes linked to the EU Emissions Trading System. John Paul II Ponta Delgada Airport, the islands’ main airport, now only has a single seasonal UK route from London Heathrow operated by British Airways.

Speaking about the cuts in Belgium, Ryanair CEO, Eddie Wilson, said in a statement: “It’s absurd that the Federal Govt have decided to increase Belgium’s aviation tax by 250% from Jan ’27, especially when competing EU countries, like Sweden, Hungary, Slovakia, regional Italy, and Albania are abolishing aviation taxes to grow traffic, tourism and jobs.

“We warned Prime Minister De Wever that increasing Belgium’s aviation tax would result in traffic cuts, but he failed to listen. As a result, Ryanair will now remove 5 aircraft from our Charleroi base and 2m seats from our Brussels schedules (Charleroi and Zaventem) for Winter ’26/Summer ’27 and relocate to more competitive economies.”

Have a story you want to share? Email us at webtravel@reachplc.com

Andy Burnham has officially begun his tenure as Britain’s prime minister with something few of his recent predecessors enjoyed: breathing room. After replacing Keir Starmer as Labour leader and becoming the United Kingdom’s seventh prime minister in just a decade, Burnham inherits an economy burdened by weak growth, strained public services and persistent cost-of-living pressures. Yet, unlike the turbulent starts experienced by previous leaders, financial markets have greeted his arrival with surprising calm.

That early confidence may prove one of Burnham’s greatest assets—or one of his greatest tests.

A Different Kind of Labour Leader

Burnham enters Downing Street with a political identity distinct from his predecessor. During his time as Mayor of Greater Manchester, he cultivated an image as a champion of regional development and public investment, earning the nickname “King of the North.”

Unlike Starmer’s cautious approach to fiscal management, Burnham has promised to “rewire Britain” through greater devolution, investment in public services, re-industrialisation and stronger local government.

Such promises normally raise concerns among investors wary of higher public spending. Yet markets have remained remarkably composed.

British government bond yields have stayed close to 5%, while sterling has strengthened against the euro since Burnham emerged as Labour’s preferred successor. Investors appear reassured by his commitment to maintaining Britain’s existing fiscal rules rather than pursuing aggressive borrowing.

Why Markets Are Staying Calm

Several factors explain why investors have not reacted negatively.

First, Burnham has avoided announcing sweeping fiscal changes during his first days in office. Instead, he has focused on politically popular issues such as healthcare, homelessness, defence and regional economic development.

Second, his appointment of former Defence Secretary John Healey as Chancellor suggests continuity rather than confrontation with financial markets.

More importantly, many economists believe economic policy will remain closely directed by Downing Street rather than being driven independently by the Treasury, reducing uncertainty over Britain’s fiscal direction.

This perception matters because markets today are extremely sensitive to fiscal credibility.

The Shadow of Liz Truss

Any discussion of British economic policy inevitably returns to September 2022.

Former Prime Minister Liz Truss’s unfunded tax-cutting budget triggered one of the worst government bond sell-offs in modern British history. Pension funds came under severe pressure, forcing the Bank of England to intervene to stabilise markets.

That episode fundamentally changed how investors assess UK fiscal policy.

The International Monetary Fund recently concluded that the crisis permanently increased the risk premium investors demand for holding British government debt. In other words, markets now react far more aggressively to any sign of fiscal irresponsibility.

Burnham understands this reality.

His repeated commitment to existing borrowing rules appears designed to reassure investors that Labour will not repeat past mistakes.

The Economic Tailwinds

Burnham also benefits from several favourable developments that could buy his government valuable time.

Inflation has moderated compared with previous years, reducing immediate pressure on the Bank of England to tighten monetary policy further.

Energy prices have also eased relative to their crisis peaks, while upcoming regulatory adjustments may further reduce household energy costs.

Another important advantage comes from the fiscal restraint maintained under former Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

Her adherence to strict borrowing limits has substantially reduced planned government debt issuance this year, giving Burnham more flexibility to adjust spending priorities without immediately alarming financial markets.

In effect, Burnham inherits a stronger fiscal starting position than many expected.

The Difficult Choices Ahead

Those advantages, however, are unlikely to last indefinitely.

Britain still faces sluggish productivity, weak investment, deteriorating public infrastructure and mounting demands for higher defence spending.

Burnham has also hinted at broader reforms that could eventually test investor confidence, including:

• Greater public control over utilities.
• Property tax reform.
• Increased defence spending.
• Adjustments to frozen income tax thresholds.
• Possible changes to National Insurance contributions.
• Expanded regional investment programmes.

Each proposal carries fiscal implications.

Delivering meaningful improvements in living standards while maintaining market confidence will require careful balancing.

The Reform UK Factor

Politics may ultimately shape economic policy more than economics itself.

Although Labour has changed leaders, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK continues to perform strongly in opinion polls.

If Burnham adopts an overly cautious approach that fails to improve public services or living standards, Reform could continue gaining political momentum.

That creates a dilemma.

Markets generally favour fiscal discipline, but voters increasingly demand visible economic change.

Burnham must therefore find a middle ground: ambitious enough to convince voters Labour can improve daily life, yet disciplined enough to convince investors Britain’s finances remain under control.

Why It Matters

Burnham’s premiership begins at a pivotal moment for Britain.

Economic growth remains weak, public confidence in government is fragile, and geopolitical uncertainty—from rising defence commitments to global trade disruptions—continues to weigh on the outlook.

Unlike many of his predecessors, Burnham enjoys a brief window of goodwill from financial markets. Whether he can convert that goodwill into lasting economic reform without unsettling investors may determine not only Labour’s electoral fortunes but also Britain’s broader economic trajectory.

Analysis

The first major test will come with Burnham’s autumn budget.

Investors will closely examine whether his government maintains fiscal discipline while introducing the reforms needed to revive growth and address Britain’s long-standing structural problems.

Markets will also monitor whether Labour can improve economic conditions quickly enough to halt the rise of Reform UK. If opinion polls continue shifting toward Nigel Farage’s party, investors may begin pricing in greater political uncertainty, reviving memories of the volatility seen during the Liz Truss government.

For now, Burnham has been handed two valuable gifts: investor patience and fiscal breathing space. Whether those advantages become the foundation of a successful premiership or simply a temporary reprieve will depend on the difficult choices his government makes over the coming months.

With information from Reuters.

The EU’s Entry/Exit System (EES) has sparked massive airport queues across Europe – with people complaining that they’ve had to wait hours to enter countries after landing

Brits looking forward to a European getaway this summer have been issued a major travel warning by an airport boss after the EU implemented its new border system.

Officials implemented the new passport control system, named the Entry/Exit System (EES), on October 12 last year, requiring British citizens travelling to the Schengen area to register biometric details – including fingerprints and a photo – on arrival. The arrangements have caused massive pileup queues in airports across the area, and the system itself is reportedly plagued with bugs.

A boss at one of the busiest airports in the EU, located in one of the most visited cities on the continent, has warned that the system has nearly tripled the amount of time it is taking Brits to travel through passport control.

Ivan Bassato, the Chief Aviation Officer at Rome’s Fiumicino airport, told the BBC that large numbers of passengers are using the €12 million (£10.2 million) self-service “kiosks”. While recent updates to the system have “improved things significantly” with the e-gates, issues remain for UK nationals, who are now taking much longer to get through the border.

He said the average time has extended from seven to 20 minutes, and the process is still taking much longer than it would have before the EES rollout.

Mr Bassato said: “We are not at the point where you have the same quality of the process [as] before the EES.” The official added that the airport was “absolutely not okay with” waits lasting between one to two hours, urging: “I think that we need to fix urgently certain aspects of the system.”

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has previously warned Brits travelling into the Schengen area that they should be “prepared to wait” as the EES is implemented, especially if it is their first visit.

The Government’s portal advises: “On your first visit to the Schengen area, you may be asked to create a digital record at the port or airport on arrival. You may be asked to submit your fingerprints and have your photo taken at dedicated booths. You don’t need to provide any information before travelling to a Schengen area country.

“The checks may take slightly longer than previously, so be prepared to wait during busy times.” Brits travelling into Rome have encountered lengthening wait times lasting hours.

Speaking to the BBC, Carl, who had travelled to the Italian capital with his family, said he was bowled over by the amount of time it took to enter the country. He said: “It was two hours queuing, from getting off the plane to getting through with children. I knew it was going to be bad, but not as bad as that.”

One traveller entering from outside the EU said in a post on Reddit that, on entry to Fiumicino, they encountered a non-EU immigration line that wrapped through duty free.

They wrote: “Flight was at 11:15 today. Arrived at FCO at 8:45. Checking in and security was a breeze. Immigration line was extremely long for non-EU passports. Wrapped through duty free into the domestic terminal. The line finally moved enough that was I was on gate side of duty free at 9:30. Made it through immigration around 9:55.

“Worth noting that we had fast pass in security and priority check in for bags. Much more time needed if we didn’t.” The European Commission has insisted that disruption in EU airports is limited, and that member states would receive continued EES support.

The move lands as EU foreign ministers remain deadlocked over a bloc-wide ban on illegal settlement trade

Belgium’s federal government has approved a ban on importing goods produced in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

It is the latest among a small but fast-growing group of European countries acting alone on a question still unresolved at EU level.

The decision came at the government’s final cabinet meeting before the summer break, the Belgian News Agency (Belga) reported on Saturday.

The move fulfils a commitment made last year over the scale of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza and its death toll.

Earlier this week, Belgian foreign minister Maxime Prevot pressed EU counterparts at a closed-doors meeting in Brussels for a bloc-wide ban, accusing the European Commission of offering ministers “a bone to chew on” rather than a genuine plan to act.

Belgium’s ban arrives as both a domestic pledge fulfilled and a signal to the EU leadership.

The case for tighter controls was strengthened this year by a Global Echo Litigation Center investigation, which examined more than 30,000 export documents covering thousands of Israeli agricultural shipments to Europe.

Roughly one in six contained goods grown in settlements in the occupied West Bank or Golan Heights, rising to nearly one in five among shipments bound for EU countries.

Investigators found exporters routinely obscured the true origin of the produce, labelling it Israeli, blending it with genuine Israeli stock, or shipping it under addresses unconnected to where it was grown.

Similar moves by others in Europe

The EU is Israel’s largest trading partner, buying close to 30 percent of its exports and accounting for nearly a third of its total trade in goods, worth 43 billion euros ($49bn) last year.

Belgium joins a list of states no longer waiting for EU-wide action.

Spain enshrined a ban in law last September, the Netherlands agreed to one in May and Slovenia adopted a similar measure earlier this year, though it has dramatically shifted its approach to Israel following the election of a more pro-Israel government.

Differences between the EU’s 27 member states have made it difficult for the bloc to act decisively on the issue.

Ireland’s parliament passed its own prohibition on July 15 , days before Belgium’s move.

The wave of national bans follows efforts earlier this month by the EU to coordinate action among its member states.

The European Commission reportedly circulated a paper to EU capitals setting out three options: an import ban, a licensing scheme, or high tariffs on settlement goods. However no decision was reached.

Five former European officials, including ex-Italian prime minister Enrico Letta and former German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, published a joint call for the EU to adopt a bloc-wide ban.

They argued that national bans like Belgium’s carry limited weight alone, since goods cleared through customs in one member state can move freely across the rest of the bloc.

A ban, they wrote, would not amount to a sanction against Israel but would simply bring EU trade policy into line with restrictions it has applied before, including on conflict minerals and goods made with forced labour.

Several EU countries, including Spain, Italy and Germany, have also acted to restrict arms exports to Israel over the war in Gaza.

Pressure is growing on the EU to sanction Israel for its expansion of illegal settlements and violence against Palestinians in the Occupied West Bank.

The European Union has renewed its call on Israel to halt the expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank, warning that continued construction and other unilateral measures threaten the viability of a future Palestinian state.

An EU spokesperson on Friday urged Israel to stop the legalisation of settlement outposts, land appropriation, demolitions, forced evictions of Palestinians, and other actions that “undermine the viability of the two-state solution”.

The statement came days after Israel’s security cabinet approved the allocation of 1.3 billion shekels ($427.8m) to establish 34 new settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The funding package marks one of Israel’s largest recent investments in settlement expansion and has drawn criticism from Palestinian officials and international partners.

The United Nations, the International Court of Justice and most countries consider Israeli settlements in territory occupied by Israel since 1967 to be illegal under international law. Israel rejects that interpretation.

The EU has long maintained that it does not recognise Israel’s sovereignty over the territories it occupied in 1967. However, the 27-member bloc remains divided over whether to take stronger measures against Israel’s settlement policy.

EU foreign ministers this week failed to reach a consensus on proposals that could restrict trade with settlements in the occupied West Bank, despite growing calls from several member states for tougher action.

The renewed diplomatic pressure comes amid continuing violence in the occupied West Bank, where Palestinians, including children, have been injured in separate incidents involving Israeli settlers and Israeli forces.

On Friday, two Palestinian children were taken to hospital after suffering head and facial injuries when Israeli settlers allegedly hurled stones at their family’s vehicle in the Wadi al-Sha’er area, according to the Palestinian news agency Wafa.

In another incident, a 16-year-old Palestinian boy was shot by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank. He remains in hospital.

“Everybody agrees that the situation in the West Bank is really intolerable,” the EU’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said ahead of talks among EU foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday.

“What is happening in the West Bank is actually making it more and more impossible that the two-state solution ever can come into effect,” she added.

Ryanair has released a statement claiming that 16 airports in Europe will create “long queues for UK families” as the school summer holidays loom and airports face their busiest time of year

Ryanair has released a strongly-worded statement claiming that “UK families face hours of extra queues as EU EES chaos continues”, naming 16 airports where “passengers are experiencing significant delays”.

The budget airline called for an emergency extension and flexibility in implementing the Entry/Exit System (EES), warning that without action families heading off on their summer holidays would face long waits. These delays would affect passengers no matter what airline they flew with.

Its statement read: “Ryanair today [July 15] warned millions of UK families travelling to Europe this summer to prepare for lengthy passport queues and airport delays caused by the EU’s failed Entry/Exit System (EES), which continues to create disruption months after its introduction.

“With schools now breaking for summer and passenger volumes reaching peak levels, the failed EES rollout is going to cause unnecessary delays and long queues for UK families.”

It claimed: “Ryanair has identified a number of recurring EES hotspots where passengers are experiencing significant delays due to slow processing times and excessive passport control queues on both arrivals and departures.”

The statement went on to name airports including both beach and city break destinations. This included family-friendly holiday hotspots such as Lanzarote, Tenerife South, Alicante, and Malaga, alongside destinations including Milan and Verona.

Ryanair went on to claim these airports suffered from similar issues, saying: “Months after EES went live, many airports still do not have fully functioning self-service kiosks in place, while border staffing levels and infrastructure remain inadequate to process peak passenger volumes. The result is avoidable delays, longer queues and unnecessary stress for UK passengers travelling during the busiest holiday period of the year.”

The airline gave advice to families heading off on their holidays soon, continuing: “Ryanair is advising UK passengers travelling to and from non-Schengen destinations, or transiting through affected European airports, to allow extra time for their journey and be prepared for extended waits at passport control, where EES checks may require passport scanning, fingerprint capture and facial image verification.”

Neal McMahon, Ryanair’s chief operations officer, said in a statement: “Families heading away for a well-earned summer holiday should be thinking about suitcases, suncream and sangria, not standing in passport queues for hours. The reality is that the EES system isn’t working properly and families are paying the price for a system that does not work months after launch. Passengers should not be the testing ground for unfished border infrastructure.

“We support calls from EU Member States to urgently extend the EES flexibilities. This will give airports and border authorities the time to improve the infrastructure, fix the broken devices and hire more staff so that families can travel through Europe without disruption.”

Full list of airports Ryanair named for ‘significant delays’

1. Lisbon
2. Tenerife South
3. Madrid
4. Lanzarote
5. Alicante
6. Malaga
7. Milan Bergamo
8. Milan Malpensa
9. Verona
10. Paris Beauvais
11. Berlin
12. Cologne
13. Frankfurt Hahn
14. Krakow
15. Budapest

Have a story you want to share? Email us at webtravel@reachplc.com

A regulatory package as a long-term political strategy

The European Union’s recent digital laws are often described as a regulatory package. The AI Act, the Data Act, and the emerging Data Union Strategy form a wide experiment in using transparency as infrastructure for the digital economy.

The underlying idea is that digital markets cannot be governed well if users, businesses, regulators, and affected individuals cannot understand how systems work, who controls data, where risks arise, and who is responsible for intervention. Therefore, transparency is becoming a condition for accountability, market access, innovation, and long-term trust that falls under what appears as a long-term strategy to regain data sovereignty.

The EU’s policy bet

The EU regulatory approach is founded on the premise that greater transparency can enhance the governability of complex digital systems. However, the mere disclosure of information does not result directly in a greater understanding of the data available; a company can disclose large amounts of technical material while leaving users no better able to assess risk, compare alternatives, or challenge decisions.

Accordingly, the success of the EU’s transparency framework should not be measured by the sheer volume of regulatory obligations it imposes. Rather, its effectiveness depends on whether those obligations generate information that is genuinely useful in practice. The relevant benchmarks are whether disclosures are meaningful, accessible, timely, and comparable, thereby enabling users and regulators to make informed decisions.

The AI Act’s goal to make AI legible

The AI Act shows the EU’s approach most clearly. Its stated purpose is to improve the functioning of the internal market, promote human-centric and trustworthy AI, protect health, safety, and fundamental rights, and support innovation (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689).

In policy terms, the AI Act tries to make AI systems legible. It assumes that AI risks should not be addressed only after harm occurs. They should be identified, documented, and managed before systems are placed on the market or deployed in sensitive settings.

This is why transparency is linked to risk. High-risk systems face more demanding documentation, monitoring, and information obligations. Lower-risk systems face lighter duties. The European Commission describes the AI Act as the first comprehensive legal framework on AI, designed to address AI risks while fostering trustworthy AI in Europe (European Commission, “Regulatory framework for AI”).

The policy logic is fundamentally pragmatic. Effective regulatory oversight depends on access to adequate information. Likewise, deployers require sufficient information to make informed decisions regarding whether and under what conditions to implement AI systems. Individuals affected by AI-assisted decisions must also have access to relevant information in order to understand how such decisions have been made and, where appropriate, to question or challenge them.

The Data Act attempts to rebalance informational power.

The Data Act uses transparency for a different purpose. Where the AI Act focuses on risk and trust, the Data Act focuses on access, fairness, and economic value. Its objective is to create harmonized rules on fair access to and use of data (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854).

The challenge is that data generated by connected products and digital services is often controlled by a small number of firms. Users may generate valuable data through their use of products but still lack practical access to it. Businesses may need data to innovate, repair products, or offer competing services but face legal, technical, or contractual barriers.

The Commission presents the Data Act as a way to address the challenges and opportunities created by data in the EU, with emphasis on fair access, user rights, and personal data protection (European Commission, “Data Act”).

In this context, transparency functions as a mechanism for redistributing information. Where users are unaware of what data is generated, how it can be accessed, or the conditions under which it may be shared, formally recognized rights of access are unlikely to translate into meaningful practical control. Effective data rights therefore depend not only on their legal recognition but also on the transparency necessary to enable individuals to exercise them.

The Data Union Strategy: From Control to Usable Data

The Data Union Strategy shows the broader direction of EU policy. The Commission frames it around increasing the availability of data for AI development, simplifying EU data rules and strengthening Europe’s position on international data flows (European Commission, “European Data Union Strategy”).

This is significant because it seems that the European Union seeks to pursue two complementary goals simultaneously. On the one hand, it aims to protect fundamental rights and mitigate the risks associated with digital technologies. On the other, it seeks to facilitate greater access to data in order to foster innovation, support the development of artificial intelligence, and enhance European competitiveness. In this way, transparency serves as the connecting principle between these objectives. In fact, by increasing the visibility of how data is collected, processed, and shared, it is intended to strengthen trust in data flows while making them more accessible and capable of supporting innovation.

Why meaningfulness matters most

Meaningfulness is the anchor test. Transparency is useful only if it reveals something that can change decisions or enable scrutiny.

In the AI context, this means information about a system’s purpose, limitations, performance, and risk profile must be specific enough to support procurement, oversight, and challenge. In the data context, it means users must receive information that helps them understand what data exists and how it can be used.

Generic compliance language is not enough. A disclosure that says a system is “risk managed” or that data is “available upon request” may be formally correct but still unhelpful. The real question is whether the information helps someone act.

Information must arrive before decisions are locked in.

Transparency is most useful when it arrives early enough to affect decisions. AI information matters most before procurement and deployment. Data-access information matters most before users become dependent on a particular product, service, or cloud provider.

Post-event transparency can still support audit and enforcement. But it is weaker as a prevention tool. A regime that informs users only after they have lost practical freedom of choice will have limited effect.

Accordingly, comparability occupies a central role in the European Union’s internal market strategy. If transparency is intended to promote competition, facilitate public procurement, and strengthen trust in cross-border digital markets, disclosures must be presented in a manner that enables users, businesses, and regulators to meaningfully compare systems, services, and contractual arrangements.

This objective is particularly relevant in the context of AI procurement, connected product ecosystems, and cloud switching, where informed comparisons are essential to reducing information asymmetries and preventing vendor lock-in. Nevertheless, pursuing comparability inevitably involves trade-offs. While standardized disclosure frameworks can improve the accessibility and consistency of information, they may also obscure sector-specific risks and contextual nuances. Consequently, a uniform template may enhance market discipline and regulatory oversight while simultaneously limiting a more nuanced understanding of the particular risks associated with individual technologies or markets.

The risk of regulatory complexity

The EU’s approach is ambitious, but it is also complex. The AI Act does not operate alone. It sits alongside the GDPR, the Data Act, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, the Cyber Resilience Act, and sector-specific rules.

A European Parliament study notes that the AI Act interacts with other digital laws, including the GDPR, Data Act, and Cyber Resilience Act, and that this interplay creates significant regulatory complexity (European Parliament, “Interplay between the AI Act and the EU digital legislative framework”).

Secondary analysis makes a similar point. CEPS has argued that the AI Act may overlap with several horizontal and sector-specific rules, creating possible gaps, inconsistencies, and legal uncertainty (CEPS, “The AI Act and emerging EU digital acquis”).

Competitiveness and the SME problem

The burden of complexity is not shared equally. Large technology firms are better able to absorb compliance costs, hire specialists, and shape standards. Smaller firms may struggle.

Bruegel has warned that EU AI regulation risks imposing disproportionate burdens on smaller firms and may contribute to market concentration if compliance demands are not properly balanced (Bruegel, “The right balance: how to fix European Union artificial intelligence regulation”). This is a key policy tension. The EU wants trustworthy digital markets, but it also wants innovation and technological sovereignty. Transparency can support both goals, but only if it is designed in a way that smaller firms can use and implement.

From disclosure to governance

The EU’s digital strategy should be judged by a practical standard. The question is not whether Europe has created the world’s most elaborate digital rulebook. The question is whether that rulebook produces usable knowledge, enables timely intervention, supports meaningful comparison and redistributes informational power.

If it does, transparency may become genuine governance infrastructure. If it does not, the EU risks building a sophisticated compliance architecture that documents the digital economy without effectively governing it.

Ukraine has appointed veteran energy executive Sergii Koretskyi as its new prime minister, marking a significant leadership change as the country continues to battle Russia’s invasion and prepares for another difficult winter.

Parliament approved the 48-year-old on Thursday as part of a wider government reshuffle announced by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Koretskyi becomes Ukraine’s third wartime prime minister and takes office at a time when Kyiv faces mounting military, economic and energy challenges.

A Political Outsider Takes Office

Unlike many of his predecessors, Koretskyi arrives in government without a political background. An engineer and economist by training, he has never held elected office or served in government and is not affiliated with any political party.

Analysts say that independence could work in his favour. Volodymyr Fesenko, director of the Penta think tank, has described Koretskyi as an experienced manager whose political neutrality makes him well suited to lead a technocratic government focused on wartime priorities rather than party politics.

More Than Two Decades in Ukraine’s Energy Sector

Koretskyi is best known for his extensive career in Ukraine’s energy industry, where he has spent more than two decades working across oil production, refining, retail fuel operations, wholesale energy management and international financing.

Since May 2025, he has served as chief executive of Naftogaz, Ukraine’s state-owned oil and gas company that oversees much of the country’s natural gas production, imports and distribution. Before taking over Naftogaz, he led Ukrnafta, Ukraine’s largest oil producer and a subsidiary of the Naftogaz Group.

Earlier in his career, Koretskyi headed Western Oil Group, served as chief executive of the Continuum Group, and managed WOG, one of Ukraine’s largest fuel station networks. Outside the energy sector, he also founded a coffee chain business in his hometown of Lutsk in western Ukraine.

Winter Energy Security Will Be the First Test

His appointment comes as Ukraine’s energy sector remains under relentless pressure from Russian missile and drone strikes. Last winter, Russia launched its most extensive campaign against Ukraine’s power infrastructure since the war began, damaging power plants, substations and transmission networks across the country.

Preparing the energy system for another winter has become one of the government’s most urgent priorities. President Zelenskiy has said ensuring stable electricity and heating supplies while strengthening protection for critical infrastructure will be among the new government’s immediate tasks.

Leading Ukraine During Wartime

Koretskyi also takes office as Ukraine faces continued battlefield pressure despite making gains through long-range strikes against Russian energy facilities and military logistics. At the same time, Kyiv continues to rely heavily on international military and financial assistance while confronting shortages of air defence interceptors needed to counter Russian missile attacks.

His background suggests the government will place a strong emphasis on energy security, infrastructure resilience and economic management as the war enters another challenging phase.

Whether Koretskyi’s experience in managing some of Ukraine’s largest energy companies translates into effective wartime leadership will likely become one of the key tests for Zelenskiy’s newly reshuffled government in the months ahead. His ability to secure Ukraine’s energy network, maintain economic stability and coordinate with international partners will be closely watched as the country prepares for another winter under the shadow of war.

With information from Reuters.

EastEnders star Tracy-Ann Oberman claims she was refused boarding on a Ryanair flight to Spain, as she was told her passport was not valid under new European rules

Actress Tracy-Ann Oberman has issued a passport warning to fellow travellers after claiming she was turned away from a Ryanair flight. The 59-year-old star, best known for her role as Chrissie Watts in EastEnders, said she had a year remaining on her passport. However, due to new European regulations, she was denied boarding.

Taking to X earlier this month, she wrote: “Just tried boarding a flight to Spain. My passport runs out June 2027. Was refused boarding because apparently it ran out in 2026 according to new European rules. Can anyone explain this to me ?I’m now stuck.” She later added: “I had a whole year [on my passport] but they said it didn’t count.

“Ryanair people said that they get fined for people travelling with the extra year on their passport and they don’t want to pay the fine is that illegal.”

One person replied: “It doesn’t matter what date is expiring, it’s only valid for 10 years from issue,” as Tracy-Ann replied: “I wasn’t aware of this. It doesn’t flag it up massively when you book the ticket.”

While another wrote: “Clock runs from issue date. Chances are you renewed yours early. The EU doesn’t recognise the ‘bonus’ months.”

Ryanair has been approached for comment.

What are the new European passport rules?

If you renewed your burgundy UK passport early, the most crucial point to bear in mind is that your passport must be less than 10 years old on the day you enter an EU country, meaning any “extra months” added to your expiry date from your previous passport are completely invalid for EU travel.

The burgundy colour and the words ” European Union ” on the cover do not matter; the document remains entirely valid as long as it meets post-Brexit requirements.

However, because the UK Passport Office used to add up to 9 months of unused validity onto early renewals prior to September 2018, your passport’s expiry date can deceive you into thinking it is valid when it is not.

Mandatory EU entry criteria

To travel to the EU and the Schengen Area, your passport must pass two independent tests:

1. The 10-year issue date rule: The passport must have a ‘Date of Issue’ that is less than 10 years ago on the day you arrive in the EU.

2. The 3-month expiry rule: The passport must be valid for at least 3 months after the day you plan to leave the EU, based on its official expiry date.

Brits with holidays booked this year to Europe could risk facing issues entering Europe if they don’t check a number on their passport well in advance

Schools across the UK will close for the six-week summer holiday, and thousands of families will be taking the opportunity to spend time together abroad during the peak travel season. However, a travel insurance specialist has issued an alert urging people to check a specific number on their passports before they jet away to avoid risk of being refused entry to Europe.

Travellers with passports issued before 2018 are being warned that they could face issues entering Europe if they don’t check a specific number, thanks to a ’10-year passport rule’. New analysis from Saga Travel Insurance found that the EU and Schengen ’10-year passport rule’ was the most discussed passport concern among travellers on Reddit, with discussions amassing 35,417 upvotes across the platform.

The Schengen area is a group of 29 European countries where travellers can move between countries without routine passport checks. It includes popular holiday destinations such as France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal.

Michelle Cooper, Director of Saga Travel Insurance, said: “EU and Schengen countries require passports to be less than 10 years old on the day of entry. While all new passports last exactly ten years, passports issued before 2018 remain valid for 10 years and nine months.

“If you have an older passport, make sure you check both the issue date and expiry date before travelling to avoid problems at the border.” Michelle warns that passengers travelling with these 10-year and nine-month passports may face issues travelling in Europe if they’re in the final nine months of their passport.”

More tha

The analysis also found that more than three-quarters (80%) of holidaymakers are unaware that different countries have different passport validity requirements, according to Saga Travel Insurance’s survey. Meanwhile, half (50%) believe that every country requires a passport to have six months remaining before travel.

Michelle said: “It’s important to check the specific rules of the country you’re travelling to so that you know how long you need to keep your passport. Some destinations require three months remaining on your passport, while others require six months.

“If you travel to a country without enough time left on your passport, there is a possibility you’ll be denied entry into the country. This could be by your airline, before flying, or by border security, once you reach your destination. If you’re denied boarding or refused entry because your passport doesn’t meet those rules, travel insurance is unlikely to cover costs such as cancelled accommodation, missed flights or return travel expenses.

“This is because the responsibility typically sits with the traveller to ensure their passport meets the entry requirements of the country they’re visiting. That’s why checking your passport carefully before travelling is one of the most important things you can do before a holiday.”

Frequent flyers could be turned away for not having enough blank passport pages

Some countries require travellers to have a minimum number of blank pages remaining in their passports for stamps and visas. Michelle says: “People can sometimes focus entirely on expiry dates and forget to check how many blank pages they have left, but some destinations can refuse entry if there isn’t enough room for official stamps or visa documentation.

“If you’re a frequent traveller, you should regularly check how many blank pages you have remaining in your passport before booking a trip. You might also benefit from purchasing a passport with additional blank pages.

“As travel systems evolve, including the gradual rollout of digital border systems such as the EU’s Entry/Exit System (EES), physical passport stamping may become less common. But for now, requirements can still vary depending on destination and border process.”

What should you do if you lose your passport?

One in 20 (5%) Brits have needed an emergency replacement passport before travelling, according to Saga Travel Insurance’s survey. And, one in 25 (4%) have cancelled a holiday because they couldn’t find their passport before departure.

Michelle says: “If you lose your passport before travelling, you can apply for a one-week fast-track application. This is an in-person application that requires an appointment, so it’s important to factor in booking availability – as well as the additional cost. It’s £76 more than a standard passport but means you should still be able to go on holiday.

“If you lose your passport while abroad, you should report this to the HM Passport Office as soon as possible. You will also need to apply for an emergency travel document online so that you can travel home. You’ll typically need a valid digital passport photo, your phone number, an email address, and a debit or credit card to make the £125 payment.

“If the loss of your passport means that you need to delay or rearrange your journey home, travel insurance may be able to help with some of the associated costs depending on your policy. Check your insurance documents and contact your insurer as soon as possible to understand your next steps.”

Brits warned over new ETIAS travel checks for Europe

From late 2026, British travellers visiting most European countries will need to apply for a new European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) before travelling. The new system is similar to the UK’s Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) scheme and will apply to visa-exempt travellers visiting 30 European countries for short stays of up to 90 days within a 180-day period.

Michelle says: “Travellers may not realise that visiting Europe will soon involve an additional pre-travel authorisation step. From late 2026, British holidaymakers will need to apply for ETIAS approval before travelling to many popular European destinations. The authorisation will be linked directly to your passport, meaning travellers could be denied boarding if their ETIAS details don’t match their travel document or if the authorisation has expired.

“Most ETIAS applications are expected to be processed within minutes, but it could take longer if additional checks are required. Holidaymakers should apply well in advance of departure to avoid last-minute disruptions.”

She added: “Similar systems already exist elsewhere. For example, UK travellers visiting the United States must apply for an Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) before departure. These systems are becoming more common globally, so it’s important to check requirements for each destination well ahead of travel.

“As with passport validity rules, people are responsible for making sure they have the correct travel authorisation before they leave the country. If someone is unable to travel because they failed to obtain valid ETIAS or ESTA approval, travel insurance is unlikely to cover costs associated with denied boarding or cancelled trips.”

European vacation rentals have entered a bizarre era where there’s more municipal red tape than luxury.

The romantic idea of escaping to a restored Tuscan farmhouse or a modernist villa overlooking the French Riviera, perhaps with a glass of local wine in hand while watching the sunset over olive groves that have stood for centuries, has run straight into the cold reality of the European Union’s fight against carbon.

How does that reconcile with holidayers who expect 3m pools heated to an exact temperature? Whole-house air conditioning? Double-door refrigerators? Massive panoramic windows?

We don’t know, but we do know that local councils are staring down energy grids that are already stressed to their absolute limits. Sustainability isn’t just a case of putting a small wooden sign in the bathroom asking guests to reuse their towels anymore.

WTTC Initiatives and the Corporate Push for Greener Stays

The World Travel & Tourism Council has spent the last few years trying to bring about that reconciliation. A massive partnership with the United Nations Environment Programme is pushing circular economy guidelines down the throats of major hospitality operators, hoping that global standards will somehow trick independent luxury property managers into compliance. It sounds great on paper. The industry wants independent certification schemes to look uniform across borders, because global corporations hate dealing with twenty different regional rules when they could just tick a single corporate checkbox instead.

For property managers, it’s trickle-down bureaucracy at its finest. You can’t just call a rental “eco-friendly” anymore because you bought organic cotton sheets, left a bottle of locally sourced olive oil on the kitchen counter, installed a Nest thermostat, and planted some lavender in the garden. The standards are tightening.

The WTTC is pushing for genuine data transparency, which means tracking actual water stewardship metrics, managing real-time grid feedback loops, auditing supply chains, and proving carbon offsets. It’s an administrative headache for anyone who just wanted to rent out a luxury apartment while drinking espresso on a private terrace.

With sustainability metrics becoming a core driver of soft power and local tourism compliance across European markets, consumer-facing tech platforms are reacting by categorizing eco-certified accommodations. Advanced search ecosystems such as Villa Picker are facilitating this transition, allowing travelers to filter properties by energy efficiency standards and regional sustainability benchmarks without sacrificing premium amenities.

Balancing High-End Amenities with Low-Impact Operations

This leaves high-end property operators in a tricky bind. Holidayers don’t want a lecture on carbon footprints when they’re paying thousands of euro a night and retrofitting a centuries-old villa with triple glazing, thick cavity wall insulation, solar roof tiles, and ground-source heat pumps is an architectural nightmare that costs a fortune.

Operators are forced to play a complicated game of smoke and mirrors with smart home technology. They’re installing automated sensors that kill the climate control the second a guest steps outside, investing in invisible greywater recycling systems, choosing low-flow rainfall showerheads that disguise water conservation as a spa experience, and buying electric vehicle charging stations that look sleek next to a rented sports car. It’s a delicate compromise. If Europe’s green transition succeeds, it’ll be because the luxury rental market figured out how to hide the machinery of sustainability behind a velvet curtain of premium comfort.