British rail operator Virgin Trains has received pre-approval to run international train services through the Channel Tunnel, potentially breaking the current monopoly held by Eurostar.
Eurostar, a French-controlled international rail operator, is the only company providing direct passenger services from England to cities such as Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris through the tunnel. But from 2030, this could change.
“This is an important next step in bringing competition and growth to the market for international rail services,” said Martin Jones, the British Office of Rail and Road deputy director of access and international, in an official press release.
Virgin will be allowed to operate trains alongside Eurostar from 2030 to 2040, with up to 20 return journeys per day. The trains will depart from London St Pancras International and travel through the undersea rail link connecting the U.K. with northern France.
Virgin owner Richard Branson, writing in October 2025 when Virgin won approval from the British regulator to use the Temple Mills International rail depot in East London, wrote: “It’s time to end this 30-year monopoly and bring some Virgin magic to the cross-Channel route … Just as we’ve challenged incumbents in the air, on the seas, and just as we’ve led the UK rail market before – we’re ready to do it all over again.”
The decision gives the project the green light on the British side, but the rail operator still needs to secure the necessary arrangements with its European partners, the British rail regulator clarified.
“Virgin Trains must also procure rolling stock, secure access to other rail networks, and obtain safety approvals from ORR and the relevant authorities in the EU,” the press release said.
In October, Branson said Virgin was working with Alstom and planned to order 12 Avelia Stream trains.
Ukraine’s normally copious grain exports are stuck in the country — caught between Russian attacks in the Black Sea, drought on the Danube and distrust among Kyiv’s closest allies.
It’s bad news for global food prices.
“If it keeps going like this, you’ll have once again a global price increase of at least 25, 30 percent, with all the consequences we had in 2022 for world food inflation,” Ukraine’s Agriculture Minister Taras Vysotskyi said.
With missile strikes keeping cargo ships away from its ports, Kyiv is scrambling, yet again, for a way out via Europe. But its fallback routes run overland through EU countries, including Poland, Hungary and Slovakia, where previous waves of Ukrainian grain left governments facing a fierce domestic backlash.
Kyiv’s fresh pleas — and insistence that the grain would only transit through its EU neighbors — have prompted Warsaw to reassure its own farmers that none of it will end up in Poland.
“We are doing everything to keep the embargo,” Polish Agriculture Minister Stefan Krajewski told Radio ZET on Monday, referring to Poland’s ban on Ukrainian grain imports.
Ukraine exported just 463,000 metric tons of grain in the first nine days of August — about one-third of the usual pace, said Vysotskyi. By November, when the new harvest comes in, the country risks running out of storage for grain it cannot export.
The non-repayable grant would subsidize bank loans, allowing small- and medium-sized farms to hold on to their grain until shipping resumes rather than sell at a loss. A Commission spokesperson confirmed receiving the request but did not say whether Brussels would provide the money.
But money can only buy time. The bigger problem is getting ships back into Ukraine’s ports.
The Port of Odesa is pictured on Feb. 19, 2026. | Oleksandr Gimanov/AFP via Getty Images
No grain vessel has entered the ports around Odesa since late July, even though they remain open. That month, a Russian missile struck a corn carrier leaving port, killing 10 people aboard. The vessel sank a week later.
“Ship owners and crews are just afraid. They are not ready to send the ships at all,” said Vysotskyi. “It’s not that it’s impossible to make it. They are just not ready to.”
Back to the border
With the Black Sea route stalled, Ukraine is negotiating with Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and Moldova to move more grain overland.
But those routes cannot simply replace maritime exports.
Moving grain by rail and road costs $50 to $70 more per ton, said Vysotskyi. When grain prices soared after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, exporters could absorb that premium. At today’s prices, they cannot.
“It’s nonprofitable,” said Vysotskyi.
Ukraine’s main alternative route, through Romania, is also running into constraints. Low water levels on the Danube are limiting the amount of cargo that can reach the Black Sea port of Constanța.
And moving more grain overland revives another problem for Kyiv: the political backlash in its EU neighbors.
Polish farmers blockaded crossings with Ukraine in 2023 and 2024, turning agricultural trade into one of the most politically explosive issues between Kyiv and one of its strongest wartime supporters.
But Ukraine, said Vysotskyi, is not asking for greater access to the EU market.
EU quotas now cap Ukrainian wheat sales to the bloc at 1.3 million tons a year, which, according to Vysotskyi, makes a repeat of the earlier influx “legally impossible.” Kyiv would seek a larger quota only if the EU itself proposed one, he added.
Low water levels on the Danube are limiting the amount of cargo that can reach the Black Sea port of Constanța. | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images
“There should be consensus inside the EU, with EU farmers,” he said.
Warsaw has been adamant that its grain embargo will stay. But while Ukrainian grain can’t be sold in Poland, the government has been working with Kyiv to help pass it through.
Talks with Kyiv “concern exclusively the smooth transport of Ukrainian grain to third countries, not its export or admission to the Polish market,” said Polish Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maciej Wewiór, adding that Ukrainian grain remains critical for many countries in Asia and Africa.
Trust deficit
For Polish farmers, assurances that the grain will pass through the country uninterrupted are not enough, with farm groups arguing that some shipments supposedly bound for other countries never actually leave Poland.
Gustaw Jędrejek, head of the Lublin Chamber of Agriculture and one of the leaders of the border blockades, alleged that shipments are recorded electronically as delivered abroad while the grain itself is sold inside Poland.
“Documents travel to Lithuania, the Czech Republic or Slovakia — and the grain stays in Poland,” he said. The Polish government has consistently denied such allegations.
Asked whether he trusted assurances that additional Ukrainian grain would simply pass through the country, Jędrejek was unequivocal.
Tourists traveling between Spain and Italy are caught in the middle of an escalating ideological feud over European border security involving Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.
Madrid on Saturday restored border controls on ships and flights arriving in Spain from Italian ports and airports, suspending passport-free travel between the two countries. Spain said the move was necessary to protect its citizens from “the persistent irregular migration pressure suffered by the transalpine country.”
The move was an unmistakable retaliation for the checks that Italy has imposed on travelers arriving from Spain since Aug. 1. Rome enacted those measures in response to the mass arrival of people in the Spanish exclave of Ceuta, citing fears that the unauthorized migrants could cross the Strait of Gibraltar and take advantage of the passport-free Schengen area to travel onward to Italy and elsewhere in the EU.
Madrid has pushed back forcefully against that narrative, and noted that the migrants could not leave the North African territory because they lack valid IDs required to travel on ferries to mainland Europe.
Spanish authorities and the European Commission this week confirmed that none of the 72,000 people who surged into Ceuta have crossed the Strait of Gibraltar. During a meeting of EU interior ministers on Tuesday, Italian Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi publicly praised Spain for its handling of the situation and expressed Rome’s “sincere solidarity” with Madrid.
Yet despite requests from Madrid, the Italian government has declined to end border checks even after it became clear that there was no risk of the Ceuta crisis spilling into the rest of Europe. Rome’s inaction prompted Spain to issue a statement on Friday threatening to adopt “proportional measures” if Rome did not change course by Aug. 9.
After Meloni’s office responded by declaring “Italy does not accept ultimatums or demands from abroad regarding national security and border control,” Madrid moved to reintroduce its own controls.
Magnus Brunner, the European commissioner for internal affairs and migration, sought to mediate in the dispute.
“I was in contact with both the Spanish and Italian Interior Ministers today. Both confirmed that the internal border controls are temporary,” Brunner said in a post on X. “I stressed the progress we’ve made on tackling illegal migration and that trust between Member States is our most valuable currency.”
“Spanish authorities assured us the events in Ceuta will have no lasting effect on the Schengen area. That is why there are signals from Italy that controls could be lifted soon,” the Austrian commissioner added.
A battle fought in passport queues
The tit-for-tat measures are emblematic of Meloni and Sánchez’s broader feud over migration policies.
Meloni slammed Madrid after it rolled out a scheme to grant legal status to more than 1 million unauthorized migrants earlier this year, and called for a debate on the consequences of the measure during a meeting of European leaders last month.
As the Ceuta crisis unfolded, the Italian premier spearheaded the drafting of a letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa in which 22 EU leaders argued Madrid’s migration policies had undermined the security of the bloc’s external borders.
“We have a duty to effectively deter and relentlessly combat illegal migration, by coordinating our action, strengthening our external borders and addressing all policies that can serve as pull factors, such as the regularization of [a] very large number of irregular migrants,” the leaders wrote.
Madrid has forcefully rejected Italy’s accusations and pointed out that none of the migrants who entered Ceuta could have benefited from the legal status scheme, which is subject to specific qualifying conditions. Moreover, Spanish officials have bristled at Rome’s suggestion that they are mismanaging the bloc’s external borders, pointing to data showing Italy is doing a far worse job of handling unauthorized migrants.
“Italy is the EU member state that has recorded the highest number of irregular crossings in recent years, with figures that have at times been twice those of Spain,” a Spanish government spokesperson said on Friday.
By reintroducing border controls, Italy and Spain have underscored the fragility of the Schengen area, which has existed since 1995 and now extends to 29 European countries.
Under the current rules, any member country is allowed to reintroduce checks for an initial period of up to six months to address security threats. The measures can be renewed for six-month periods for up to two years, and, in exceptional circumstances, up to three years.
Few expect the spat between Rome and Madrid to endure for that long, but in the meantime those traveling between the two countries will have to endure the resulting inconvenience.
Throughout the week, passengers on flights departing from Spanish airports have complained about the scrutiny they have faced upon arrival in Italy, with travelers reporting significant delays as Italian carabinieri checked their IDs. On Saturday, passengers on Italian flights arriving in Spain were subjected to similar controls, with National Police holding travelers who could not provide official identification.
Some 3.2 million Spaniards traveled to Italy in 2024, and 5.4 million Italians visited Spain. The renewed controls could push travelers to reconsider trips between the two countries — and make other European destinations the inadvertent beneficiaries of an ideological battle playing out in passport queues.
This article has been updated with additional reporting by Gabriel Gavin.
BERLIN — A drone packed with explosives discovered at Leipzig Airport is raising fears of foreign interference in upcoming German regional elections in which far-right politicians have campaigned on fears of escalations with Moscow.
The drone — found at a strategic airport serving Ukrainian and NATO aircraft as well as a major DHL logistics hub — is being seen as evidence of a potential act by “foreign powers,” said German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt.
The Kremlin has been accused of seeking to sway September’s elections in Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg–Western Pomerania, states in the former communist East Germany where pro-Russian sentiment remains strong and where the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party could take power for the first time at the state level.
“We do of course see that Russia attempts every day, in one way or another — through hybrid means and various measures — to exert influence here in Germany in a manner that seeks to undermine our democracy and erode trust in politics and politicians,” said Martin Giese, a foreign ministry spokesperson.
Russian disinformation campaigns have portrayed German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and his government as warmongers. They aim to undermine the already unpopular chancellor and boost Russia-friendly forces such as the AfD and the far-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) — both of which are strong in eastern Germany.
“The state elections in Saxony-Anhalt and in eastern Germany are, of course, a major target of Russian influence, because these are pivotal elections in the heart of Europe,” said Stefan Meister, a Russia expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations.
He said that it is too early to attribute the explosive-laden drone to Russia as investigations are still ongoing. But he added that Moscow is clearly waging a broad hybrid campaign targeting the region ahead of next month’s votes.
“This could be the first time right-wing populists come to power,” Meister said. “And with that, the chancellor might even fall — or at the very least, the coalition would be severely weakened — and a pro-Russian party would come to power in one of the federal states.”
“There is a major campaign underway on the Russian side to influence these elections in favor of the AfD and the BSW,” he added.
The drone incident risks raising fears in Germany that their country’s support for Ukraine is bringing the war closer to home.
The Leipzig-Halle airport has been a target in the past. In July 2024, an incendiary parcel caught fire at a DHL facility there shortly before it was due to be loaded onto an aircraft. European investigators later identified 22 suspects allegedly working for Russian military intelligence in the wider parcel plot.
The airport is among Germany’s most strategically important transport hubs.
Polls show that the AfD has a chance of winning an outright majority in Saxony-Anhalt on Sept. 6. | Jens Schülter/AFP via Getty Images
It is the home base for NATO’s SALIS airlift program, which gives nine participating countries access to Ukrainian Antonov aircraft capable of carrying oversized military cargo for national, EU and alliance missions.
The incident adds to a feeling of insecurity, which could help populist parties, said Meister.
“It’s once again obvious that we’re simply very vulnerable,” he said.
An interior ministry spokesperson said Wednesday that the government was monitoring a campaign it called “Matryoshka,” and regarded it as serious.
German officials said this week that fabricated videos that falsely accused candidates of corruption, sexual misconduct and other crimes appeared to have mimicked trusted outlets such as the German regional public broadcaster ARD and the U.K.’s BBC.
Independent researchers have gone further. Deutsche Welle counted more than 180 fake posts linked to Matryoshka targeting September’s three elections. The posts largely attacked candidates from centrist parties, while sparing the AfD and BSW, according to researchers.
“We can’t rule out the possibility that foreign powers are behind this,” Dobrindt told public broadcaster ZDF Wednesday evening. “That will now be part of the investigation, but there are many indications pointing in that direction,” he said.
Dobrindt stopped short of naming Russia specifically in his statements but said that “a hybrid threat is evident” and that such threats do not originate from amateurs but are “often linked to foreign powers.”
“Of course, we all want to know which foreign powers are involved. But it would be reckless to give credence to any kind of speculation at this point,” he added.
Leipzig Airport serves as a strategic hub for NATO, including for military transports to Ukraine. The airport is also international courier service DHL’s largest European air hub and serves as a temporary home for some Ukrainian Antonov aircraft, protecting them from Russian attacks. The armed drone was found just meters away from such a plane, said officials Wednesday.
Armin Schuster, minister of the interior for Saxony — where Leipzig is located — told ZDF that the incident represented a new threat level.
“Without wanting to preempt the investigation, I would describe this as a suspected attack scenario because this is the first time we’ve had a drone that was also loaded with explosives,” he said. “That’s new.”
An airport worker found the drone Tuesday night. Officers disarmed the device by removing its detonator, which had failed to go off. In a separate incident at the same airport, another flying object struck a DHL cargo aircraft as it was being diverted away from the airport after the explosive-laden drone was found.
A new survey quantifies the financial and emotional toll of flight disruptions, pointing to a widening gap between passenger rights on paper and passenger experience in practice.
Nearly eight in 10 travelers experienced a flight disruption in the past year, and for most the damage went well beyond the inconvenience itself. A new survey from AirHelp, a company dedicated to supporting travelers throughout their journey, puts a number on what disruption actually costs passengers: an average of €514 out of pocket, plus a real toll on their time, plans and well-being.
These figures reflect an industry operating under sustained pressure, with disruption continuing to shape the everyday experience of millions of travelers.
Air travel has largely recovered from its pandemic-era lows, but disruption remains a persistent feature of modern flying, driven by everything from air traffic control constraints to weather, staffing and aging infrastructure. Globally, 79 percent of respondents had a flight canceled, delayed by more than two hours or otherwise disrupted in the past 12 months. Of those disruptions, 50 percent were delays over two hours, 15 percent were cancellations, and 14 percent involved delayed, lost or damaged luggage. These figures reflect an industry operating under sustained pressure, with disruption continuing to shape the everyday experience of millions of travelers.
The financial toll
Globally, nearly three-quarters of passengers (73 percent) incurred additional expenses due to disruptions, with costs averaging €514 per person, although that figure masks wide differences. It also marks a clear increase from previous surveys, which found average costs of just €362.50 per passenger.
UK and German travelers report the highest average costs, at roughly €708 and €619 respectively. Portuguese and Spanish travelers report the lowest, at approximately €277 and €340. The United States and Brazil sit in the mid-to-high range, at around €577 and €529. The spread likely reflects differing living and wage levels, but it also means the highest-cost markets can see disrupted trips cost nearly three times what they would in the cheapest.
Money isn’t the only thing that weighs on passengers during disruptions.
Fifty-seven percent of passengers had to spend extra out of pocket during a disruption. Another 20 percent lost money that couldn’t be recovered, a non-refundable hotel stay, for instance, while 5 percent lost income they’d expected to earn. Just over a quarter, 27 percent, said the disruption cost them nothing.
Emotional toll
Money isn’t the only thing that weighs on passengers during disruptions. Sixty-eight percent of all respondents globally cited stress or frustration as a consequence of their disruption. That finding holds up when you look at what passengers rated as a major problem. Globally, waiting around for long periods ranked as the most common major complaint, cited by 50 percent of passengers, followed closely by stress itself at 43 percent.
The knock-on effects extended well beyond the airport. Thirty percent said the disruption derailed specific plans during their trip, such as sightseeing or connecting activities. Twenty-nine percent reported negative health or well-being effects like fatigue, missed sleep or illness. Twenty-two percent missed work or professional obligations, and 20 percent missed personal events like family gatherings or celebrations. Only 8 percent said they experienced no impacts beyond the disruption itself.
A pattern of inconsistent support
Much of the toll passengers describe traces back to communication. Many report not knowing what support or compensation they were entitled to during a disruption. Globally, in-the-moment support was inconsistent: 47 percent of passengers said they never received vouchers, air miles or future discounts, and 44 percent said they never received cash compensation or money back for their costs. Basic support fared a little better but was still patchy- 38 percent never received food and drink, while adequate information about the disruption was more reliably provided, with just 25 percent saying they never got it.
These findings vary by market. On cash compensation, American passengers were the least likely to receive money back, with 52 percent receiving none, while German passengers were the most likely, with only 34 percent reporting none.
The regulatory question
Over a third of travelers (35 percent) said they didn’t know that regulations protecting passenger rights exist when flying in Europe. Among those who might have been eligible for compensation, 31 percent globally never filed a claim simply because they didn’t know they could, while another 22 percent held back because the process seemed too complicated.
Travellers are paying a very high price for flight disruptions, and the damage goes well beyond the bank balance.
Tomasz Pawliszyn, CEO of AirHelp
These findings come from a global survey commissioned by AirHelp and launched in February, polling 1,996 passengers across the UK, Europe, the United States and Brazil about their experiences with flight disruptions over the past 12 months.
“Travellers are paying a very high price for flight disruptions, and the damage goes well beyond the bank balance,” says Tomasz Pawliszyn, CEO of AirHelp. He points to the gap between the protections that exist on paper, air passenger rights laws and what passengers actually experience.
“Passengers are entitled to care and, in many cases, compensation when their flight is disrupted,” Pawliszyn said. “But when the majority of travelers remain uninformed, that protection isn’t reaching the people it’s meant for.”
The findings point to a narrower and more tractable question than airline performance itself: whether existing consumer-protection rules are being communicated clearly enough to function as intended. As aviation authorities in the UK, EU and elsewhere continue reviewing passenger rights frameworks, this data suggests the more urgent gap may not be the rules themselves, but how well travelers understand them.
BRUSSELS — The EU’s new biometric border-check system is causing such long delays for summer travelers that some airports are turning to a simple solution: switching it off when they’re overwhelmed by arriving travelers.
The quick fix, which is allowed under EU regulations, wasn’t what was envisioned when the Entry/Exit System was gradually introduced in October and went fully into force on April 10.
And yet, many airports are doing just that.
“When lines form during the busy summer months, the system is shut off to ensure smooth transit at our hubs in Paris and Amsterdam,” Air France-KLM told POLITICO.
Airline CEOs, border authorities, and airport officials said biometric checks are suspended when border crossings become congested at other hubs, including in Frankfurt, Brussels and Milan.
The EES applies to non-EU citizens entering the 29-country Schengen zone. Instead of heading to a border agent to get passports stamped, passengers have to use an EES kiosk to provide their fingerprints and be photographed — which will be kept on file for three years — but if those aren’t working then the information has to be taken manually.
They then head either to electronic passport gates or to border agents to enter. The goal is to keep track of visa overstays.
“The advantages of the new system for the EU are evident,” said Guillaume Mercier, a Commission spokesperson. “It increases the security of EU citizens and replaces paper stamping with a modern system of registration and checks.”
The Commission said earlier this year that biometric checks allowed authorities to detect identity frauds that would otherwise “likely have gone undetected.”
Many airports, ports, road border crossings and rail terminals have adapted to the new demands, but tourist-heavy locations have seen hours-long waits.
“Connecting flights were missed due to the EU entry system,” Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr said on Tuesday.
Under pressure from the travel industry, the Commission granted a waiver for the peak summer season lasting until Sept. 6. The EES regulation “includes the possibility to temporarily suspend the registration of biometrics in case of exceptional circumstances during the summer,” said Mercier.
Under pressure from the travel industry, the European Commission granted a waiver for the peak summer season lasting until Sept. 6. | Kenzo Trbouillard/AFP via Getty Images
“We’ve been able to achieve this with German authorities and with Frankfurt Airport because delays were getting too long,” Spohr told reporters.
This exception applies to all entry points, not just airports.
A British traveler, Rene Colandog, said on Friday he only had to present his passport before boarding a Eurostar train at London St. Pancras last month. Facial scans and fingerprints were not required.
“I’m OK with this biometric system … as long as it’s for security,” Colandog said before boarding the train from Brussels back to London.
Teething troubles
The EES was adopted in 2017, but it was delayed for years because border authorities were not ready to handle the additional workload.
Even now, getting travelers properly registered in the new system still requires significant staffing. Another problem is that the EES is still new, so almost all travelers are registering for the first time — creating additional delays.
“At Milan Malpensa Airport, border control teams currently consist of about 35 people,” said Cristian Sternativo, a border control officer at the Italian airport and local representative of Italy’s Autonomous Police Union.
To carry out all the checks required by the EES without creating long lines, “at least 10 to 15 more people would be needed during the busiest times,” he added.
It is “unthinkable” to expect the EES to operate at full capacity with the current level of staffing because the new system “requires more time,” he said.
Even at Brussels Airport — barely 10 kilometers from the EU institutions — the technology is still not fully operational; biometric data collection suspensions started well before the summer under a derogation issued in late March after 600 passengers missed their flights over just 21 hours.
“The Federal Police Border Control may decide to apply this derogation when necessary,” Belgium’s police confirmed this week.
Even at Brussels Airport — barely 10 kilometers from the EU institutions — the technology is still not fully operational. | Jasper Jacobs/Belga Mag/AFP via Getty Images
A strict application of the full procedure “would lead to public order issues” because “there are certain peak periods when the current infrastructure isn’t sufficient to accommodate everyone,” Sternativo said.
“The traveler is always registered in the EES and the required travel document data are entered into the system,” the Belgian federal police said in a written reply, adding that “the security of border checks and compliance with European regulations remain our absolute priority.”
Passenger experiences vary depending on where they enter the EU.
Kathleen Glass, who regularly travels from the U.K. to the EU, waited only about 15 minutes to complete biometric checks at London St. Pancras on Friday morning before boarding a Eurostar train to Brussels.
William, from Edinburgh, who asked not to have his surname published, said biometric checks at a German airport during Christmas took between 40 and 50 minutes.
The ability to suspend biometric collection appears to be keeping the system functioning this summer.
“Although we are early into the summer season, we are not receiving reports of excessive queues,” said Luke Petherbridge, director of public affairs for the Association of British Travel Agents.
The stress over the EES is only a precursor to the next border technology change being planned by Brussels. The bloc’s next goal is the online European Travel Information and Authorization System, which will require travelers from 59 visa-exempt countries to preregister, undergo a security check and pay a small fee before entering Schengen.
ETIAS — similar to systems already in use in the U.K., and the U.S. — was originally supposed to launch in 2021, and then later this year, but is now delayed until 2027.
LONDON — The U.K. capital’s transport authority has granted approval for Wayve and Uber to begin giving rides to members of the public in autonomous vehicles.
Transport for London (TfL) said it licensed 15 modified vehicles operated by the companies, which have a partnership, as “Private Hire Vehicles” (PHV) on a trial basis.
In a statement, London-based startup Wayve said the licenses were “an important step forward” that will allow it to begin giving rides to a small number of passengers later this summer ahead of a full public launch.
Wayve said its vehicles “are designed to operate autonomously, and will do the driving,” though under TfL’s rules, a licensed PHV driver must be present and responsible for the vehicle at all times.
“Safety is our top priority,“ a TfL spokesperson said. “Any new vehicle licensed to carry passengers on London’s roads must align with our Vision Zero goal of eliminating all deaths and serious injuries from collisions on London’s streets by 2041.”
Successive U.K. governments have sought to make the country a European pioneer in self-driving technology.
The Department for Transport opened a permitting scheme for companies to operate commercial robotaxi services without a human driver in May. Applications for that scheme — which is separate from TfL’s PHV regime — continue to be assessed by central government with input from local transport authorities including TfL.
Getting licenses isn’t the only obstacle facing robotaxi services. A survey by the London Assembly’s Transport Committee this month identified widespread opposition to autonomous passenger vehicles among the capital’s inhabitants, with just 29 percent of Londoners saying they support the roll out.
For Europe’s maritime sector—and beyond—the European Commission’s proposal to revise the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) goes in the right direction and reflects much of what Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) has consistently called for: a framework in which carbon pricing supports, rather than holds back, the maritime transition, strengthens Europe’s industrial competitiveness and preserves connectivity, including for outermost regions. The starting point is an encouraging one.
Nikos Mertzanidis, executive director, Europe, Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA)
The proposal matters because it is about far more than carbon pricing. Not that the sector shies away from that: cruise lines already comply with the ETS, in addition to port dues, passenger charges, tonnage-based taxes and value-added tax (VAT). Unlike traditional taxation, the ETS is designed to drive decarbonization. Its revision matters because, by reinvesting a greater share of maritime ETS revenues in infrastructure—ports, shore-side electricity, alternative fuels, bunkering and other facilities—Europe can help the maritime industry maintain its global leadership while accelerating the energy transition. That leadership is not a matter of prestige. It is a matter of European prosperity, jobs, skills, competitiveness and industrial capacity across the continent.
The cruise industry alone generates an annual economic impact of €64.1 billion in Europe and supports 445,000 jobs. It is also one of Europe’s industrial success stories, combining world-leading shipbuilding, advanced engineering and maritime innovation with high-value tourism. Behind those figures lies a shipbuilding story that few industries can match: 98 percent of the global cruise orderbook is built in European shipyards, from Fincantieri in Italy to Chantiers de l’Atlantique in France and the Meyer yards in Germany and Finland. There is €62.2 billion committed to ships on order through 2037. This investment sustains a vast ecosystem of engineering firms, technology providers and thousands of suppliers, keeping in Europe the skills and industrial capacity that other regions of the world are actively trying to attract.
By reinvesting a greater share of maritime ETS revenues in infrastructure—ports, shore-side electricity, alternative fuels, bunkering and other facilities—Europe can help the maritime industry maintain its global leadership while accelerating the energy transition.
That is why it is important to be clear about cruise’s role in Europe. Cruise is a key part of the maritime industry: we build ships, move people between ports and across seas, and help drive innovation and investment through one of the most advanced supply chains in Europe. Cruise should therefore be understood first and foremost as part of Europe’s maritime industrial ecosystem, combining maritime transport, advanced manufacturing and tourism in a way few sectors do. It is governed by an extensive regulatory framework alongside the rest of international shipping while supporting one of Europe’s most innovative maritime value chains.
Via Shutterstock
Cruise represents just a small fraction of the global fleet—less than one percent of commercial vessels—but it is consistently at the forefront of maritime’s transformation in ways that benefit the broader maritime sector. Decarbonization is our north star, and our experience shows that it advances fastest when it travels hand in hand with innovation. Done well, decarbonization is not only an environmental objective but also a driver of industrial modernization and European competitiveness. This is why cruise matters to Europe’s maritime future: the industry is helping to turn decarbonization ambition into industrial progress—investing more than €44 billion since 2022 in new ships designed to meet or exceed Europe’s environmental regulations to improve performance and advance the maritime transition.
The cruise industry alone generates an annual economic impact of €64.1 billion in Europe and supports 445,000 jobs. It is also one of Europe’s industrial success stories, combining world-leading shipbuilding, advanced engineering and maritime innovation with high-value tourism.
More than half of the capacity on order today is capable of using liquefied natural gas (LNG), which can reduce CO2 emissions by up to 20 percent compared with conventional fuels. And while LNG is not the end-game solution, it does serve as an important bridge to lower-emissions fuels like renewable and synthetic methane as these types of fuels become available at scale. Today, 57 percent of cruise ships on order are designed with multi-fuel capability, meaning their engines will be able to run on low and zero greenhouse gas fuels, when available at scale. In addition, more than 60 percent of the global cruise fleet can already connect to shore-side electricity where ports are equipped, allowing ships to switch engines off at berth and reduce emissions by up to 98 percent. By 2028, close to 75 percent of capacity will be shore-power-ready.
The environmental transition is broader than carbon reduction alone. Across the global fleet, 225 ships—80 percent of the fleet and 84 percent of passenger capacity—are outfitted with advanced wastewater treatment systems, with more than a third capable of meeting stricter Baltic Sea Special Area discharge standards. More than 94 percent of the reporting fleet produces freshwater onboard, and approximately 60 percent can meet their full onboard consumption needs. Together, the cruise sector’s advancements in environmental technologies and practices help reduce emissions, support responsible operations and lessen pressure on local infrastructure in the destinations cruise ships visit.
Europe leads the world in cruise shipbuilding, maritime innovation and the deployment of technologies that can help decarbonize shipping.
Via CLIA
None of this happens in isolation from the places we serve. Cruise itineraries are planned up to three years in advance, which makes cruise one of the most predictable forms of tourism and allows ports, destinations and operators to manage visitor flows together. The economic footprint is tangible and local: when a ship provisions in port, a single day’s order of fresh produce alone can be worth some €150,000 to local suppliers, before counting fuel, services, excursions and the wider activity a call generates. And because cruise ships connect islands, outermost regions and remote coastal communities—often where alternative transport links are limited—cruise can extend the tourism season and spread benefits well beyond the traditional hotspots.
The road ahead, through the European Parliament, Council and trilogues, will be long, and we will walk it constructively together with our members and institutions at every stage. But the compass is set. Europe leads the world in cruise shipbuilding, maritime innovation and the deployment of technologies that can help decarbonize shipping. By preserving that leadership and reinvesting the sector’s ETS contribution into maritime infrastructure, fuels and facilities, the ETS will not merely price emissions—it will help build the ports, fuels and ships of the future, preserving the competitiveness and global leadership of Europe’s maritime industry for decades to come.
Disclaimer
POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT
The sponsor is Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA)
The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS).
Login
