Seek to rejoin the EU pet passport scheme

One thing on fun is that they know how to spend others money and come up with endless excuses to do so, but never come up with any thing the people want they have taken the money off of.
 
Ivory55 said:
One thing on fun is that they know how to spend others money and come up with endless excuses to do so, but never come up with any thing the people want they have taken the money off of.
Click to expand...
But what sort of thing?. The net contributers to the overall tax system will be higher rate payers surely you're not suggesting higher opera and arts subsidies it wouldn't feature on my list of priorities.
 
I have paid for schools etc but having never had kids can I claim a rebate?
 
Depends on whether you think you have had any benefit from people who have passed through the education system - ever used a doctor, lawyer or even had dealings with people who can read & write.
 
seamus62 said:
Welcome John.

Not sure this is a simple decision. Joining or rejoining any EU scheme which provide benefits will come at a cost. The EU will levy a charge on the UK for the benefit. At this stage we have no idea what that cost may be but ultimately it will mean the UK taxpayer paying for those who make use of the scheme (ie all those who don't have a pet and those who don't travel internationally with their pet). The petition does not make this point clear. I agree the costs are too high but believe they should be shouldered by those who make use of the scheme. Just my view.
Click to expand...
PaddyM said:
It may well do but not in the short to medium term it won’t , in the short term it very much is “ that’s it then “ and that decision will not be ours but very much “ theirs “
I very much hope that in the future the EU will grow up , though history tells us that may not be the case .
Click to expand...
As for the growing up comment I think you should look in the mirror

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
As I understand it, the UK still honours the Pet Passport scheme for incoming pets of EU owners, whilst UK pet-owners without the benefit of an EU-issued Pet Passport have to jump through the AHC hoops, with added expense for owners and additional work for vets. Does this seem "grown-up" on the part of the EU? After all, as stated elsewhere, at least one of the original reasons if not the only one for the scheme was to protect the UK from importing rabies from EU countries, however rare cases may be these days. To my knowledge there have been no cases of rabies in the UK for a very long time.
And what about Assistance Dogs who are now caught up in this mire of the EU's making? Their owners who need or want to travel to the EU with them are subject to this additional cost and hassle simply because they have a disability - which under the Equality Act 2010 (and yes, I realise this is a UK act but similar exist in the EU) means disabled owners of Assistance Dogs are being actively discriminated against by the EU.
 
Never ceases to amaze me how people don't understand that "Brexit got done" we "wanted" to leave apparently, we "left" apparently. We no longer are a member. Please understand, that means we no longer have access to the benefits of membership. We are not a special case that can leave spouting all the jingoistic guff that we do and expect to still keep the benefits. That's it, it's over. Lies were told, people believed (and continue to do so). Now we reap the rewards of that and the pet passport is just one tiny example. Grrrrrrrrrrr
 
Four points :-
  • it was originally setup at the behest of the UK to facilitate movement of dogs and cats into the UK
  • UK still fulfils all the necessary technical criteria
  • It wouldn't be a great exception for the UK to rejoin PP scheme - other non EU countries are in it - NZ, Canada, US etc
  • it isn't going to happen soon
 
The Wino said:
We all do to some extent already. You could argue the reason we like to motorhome in France is because they in effect subsidise us and provide Aires. There's a lot on here who ride motor bikes but we all know that they are more often involved in accidents requiring health spending aren't they being subsidised.
Click to expand...
If you want to go down the subsidising route, why single out motorcyclist? What about smokers, drinkers and voluntarily obese. How about people who partake in sports of all kinds? Obviously you are carrying a chip about motorcyclists. I think you will find we all subsidise each other, including all the benefit scroungers.
 
ronecc1 said:
If you want to go down the subsidising route, why single out motorcyclist? What about smokers, drinkers and voluntarily obese. How about people who partake in sports of all kinds? Obviously you are carrying a chip about motorcyclists. I think you will find we all subsidise each other, including all the benefit scroungers.
Click to expand...
That was just an example of what for most is a hobby I totally agree that we all subsidise others hobbies and lifestyle choices to some extent. I don't have a chip about motorcyclists I used to be one and quite fancy one for the back of the MH

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Aireworth said:
Four points :-
  • it was originally setup at the behest of the UK to facilitate movement of dogs and cats into the UK
  • UK still fulfils all the necessary technical criteria
  • It wouldn't be a great exception for the UK to rejoin PP scheme - other non EU countries are in it - NZ, Canada, US etc
  • it isn't going to happen soon
Click to expand...
How does this work, please, for countries like NZ, Canada, US? They are all Part 2 listed countries so seem to need an AHC to enter the EU, as we now do.
 
Sorry, I got the countries wrong. But my point stands I think as Andorra, Switzerland, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, San Marino, Vatican City State are all not in the EU but can all issue Pets Passports that are accepted by the EU (as I understand it from https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/carry/animal-plant/index_en.htm )
 
Aireworth said:
Sorry, I got the countries wrong. But my point stands I think as Andorra, Switzerland, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, San Marino, Vatican City State are all not in the EU but can all issue Pets Passports that are accepted by the EU (as I understand it from https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/carry/animal-plant/index_en.htm )
Click to expand...
Ah ok, those are the Part 1 listed countries - which is what we logically should be.
 
Whilst the point has been made above, we all understand that leaving the EU meant that we would lose some of the benefits we enjoyed previously. However, the galling part is that we were a member of the scheme - following all the same rules (probably better than other member states) and then on leaving were relegated to a 'Part II listed country'. This was illogical as Andorra, Switzerland, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, San Marino, Vatican City State are not part of the EU but are listed as 'Part I listed countries'. There is no reason why we should be Part II and we probably have far better standards than some of the other EU states. It is part of the EU castigating us for leaving. The question is whether the UK government have the wit or time to argue for reinstatement of the scheme.

The French vets must be crying into their stack of unused Drontal tablets. My guess (from a vague remembrance) was that 250,000 people travelled to France with at least one pet pre-Brexit. If they all had one dog only, then at 50 euros a piece, this was worth E12.5m to the French economy with relatively few northern French vets making a very nice living - thank you very much.
 
I always thought that it was the UK (in the form of DEFRA?) that insisted on a Pet Passport, simply because it a only ever checked when entering the UK.

The French didn't do any checking when entering (via Eurotunnel).

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
ianthelawyer said:
Whilst the point has been made above, we all understand that leaving the EU meant that we would lose some of the benefits we enjoyed previously. However, the galling part is that we were a member of the scheme - following all the same rules (probably better than other member states) and then on leaving were relegated to a 'Part II listed country'. This was illogical as Andorra, Switzerland, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, San Marino, Vatican City State are not part of the EU but are listed as 'Part I listed countries'. There is no reason why we should be Part II and we probably have far better standards than some of the other EU states. It is part of the EU castigating us for leaving. The question is whether the UK government have the wit or time to argue for reinstatement of the scheme.

The French vets must be crying into their stack of unused Drontal tablets. My guess (from a vague remembrance) was that 250,000 people travelled to France with at least one pet pre-Brexit. If they all had one dog only, then at 50 euros a piece, this was worth E12.5m to the French economy with relatively few northern French vets making a very nice living - thank you very much.
Click to expand...
Are there any countries not part of the customs union in our situation?. It seems to me that once we decided to be totally out we became totally out! Most of the countries listed have land borders with the EU some are totally surrounded by EU countries it would make little sense for them to be required to have pet passeports as there are no border checks. If it's anti UK why is Gibraltar excempt maybe it's because we didn't want to agree to a pet passport system with the EU in charge for the UK mainland wouldn't surprise me.
 
I don't think the petition will go anywhere sadly but duly signed and also by my wife (I must mention it to her sometime...). We did lose many simple freedoms when we came out.
 
We have just got our two dogs German passports. Our daughter and her family live in Germany so we go often. Does anyone know what we need to get back into Germany via France? We will go by le shuttle. Do the dogs need any examination or stamps in the passport before we travel? Thanks for any advice, I am sure someone has managed it!
 
SWW said:
We have just got our two dogs German passports. Our daughter and her family live in Germany so we go often. Does anyone know what we need to get back into Germany via France? We will go by le shuttle. Do the dogs need any examination or stamps in the passport before we travel? Thanks for any advice, I am sure someone has managed it!
Click to expand...
You just need their German pet passports - that’s it. That’s the whole point of getting them, so that you can travel as easily as when we could use UK pet passports. Only thing that changes is that all future rabies boosters must be done in the EU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
The Wino said:
Are there any countries not part of the customs union in our situation?. It seems to me that once we decided to be totally out we became totally out! Most of the countries listed have land borders with the EU some are totally surrounded by EU countries it would make little sense for them to be required to have pet passeports as there are no border checks. If it's anti UK why is Gibraltar excempt maybe it's because we didn't want to agree to a pet passport system with the EU in charge for the UK mainland wouldn't surprise me.
Click to expand...
The following link explains why Gibraltar is Part 1 listed:

https://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/uploads/news/October 2020/TN - FR - Border - Pets.pdf

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Just received this:

You recently signed the petition “Seek to rejoin the EU pet passport scheme”: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/593806

MPs will hold a debate on pet travel on Thursday 2 December in Westminster Hall. The debate will be led by Sheryll Murray MP.

The debate will start at 3pm and last for up to an hour and a half.

Watch the debate: https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/46bdde53-5e55-490c-93fc-1e6ccd879646

You'll be able to read a transcript of the debate a few hours after it happens: Broken Link Removed

This will be a general debate. General debates allow MPs to debate important issues, however they do not end in a vote nor can they change the law.
 
I had that email earlier today and this afternoon I thought I’d have a look, couldn’t get the link to work.
 
Like every thing if you want something it has to be paid for or something in exchange, may be the trade off was not worth it.
 
John Barrett said:
It needed an MP to adopt it as their pet project...
Click to expand...
Hopefully it will put a flea in the ear of one of them! :giggle:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top