Travel industry chiefs demand better Foreign Office advice
Exclusive: Call for ‘clarity’ and ‘consistency’ after criticism of official warnings
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.With holidays abroad soon to be permitted, senior travel industry figures have demanded that Foreign Office travel advice reverts to “its intended purpose”.
Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the Foreign Office (FCDO) has been criticised for basing go/no-go warnings entirely on the basis of Covid figures.
Last August, Danny Callaghan, chief executive of the Latin American Travel Association, said: “People are looking at Foreign Office advice and seeing it as redundant. The travel trade are rapidly losing faith in that advice.”
Just ahead of the government’s announcement of a “green list” of low-risk destinations, the chief executives of Airlines UK and Abta, the travel association, have written to the Foreign Office asking for “clarity” and “consistency” in the travel advice.
Tim Alderslade of Airlines UK, representing leading carriers. said: “We’re waiting to hear more from the government on the traffic light system, but we also need clarity on the use of Foreign Office travel advice.
“That advice needs to be used for its intended purpose, to assess the risk to individuals travelling to a particular destination, and it should also be consistent and coordinated with the traffic light system – providing clarity for the industry and travellers.”
One problem with consistency is that the Foreign Office looks at a broad range of risks, while the traffic light policy is focused on coronavirus rates – leading to discrepancies between the two.
Abta’s chief executive, Mark Tanzer, called for the “islands” policy to resume – allowing different travel advice to apply to separate regions of larger countries.
“Protecting public health must be the main priority for the government which is why a risk-managed approach to returning to international travel is really important,” he said.
“Reintroducing the islands policy and adopting a regional approach to travel advice for large countries, which is informed by the health data around infection and vaccination rates, is a risk-based and pragmatic way of opening up international travel.
“It would help to enable the safe return of travel to more destinations while continuing to manage the risk to individuals.”
A UK government spokesperson said: “The government has set out that international travel will resume on 17 May at the earliest.
“Further details will be set out later this week, including which countries will fall into which traffic light list.
“FCDO travel advice continues to be regularly updated to provide up-to-date information and advice on the risks to British travellers abroad.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments