Yet, for over 70 years there is a hidden issue which affects the health and comfort of passengers and crew: contaminated cabin air quality, often referred to as “fume events” or “aerotoxic syndrome”.

Despite industry assurances and regulatory frameworks, the argument exists that the standards governing cabin air quality are non-binding and not legally enforceable. Regulators in Europe would counter that by stating that an airline or manufacturer has to demonstrate compliance with regulation otherwise there can be no certification of product nor indeed operations.

Share

But this evident gap not only leaves many questions about how passengers and crew are truly protected, but it also cuts to the heart of how these standards are created, perhaps suggesting a ‘Patriarchal’ or ‘Doctor know best’ methodology in their creation.

A good example of that is found through the work that I and colleagues from across Europe took part in, to challenge an existing European Standard on Cabin Air Quality, created by Aviation professionals, with no aircrew, their representatives nor consumers in the room during its creation. The Standard in question was overturned and new work was created to develop a new Standard for Cabin Air Quality. But for Standards that form part of the regulatory environment, there is no such diverse engagement apart from the apparent ability to comment via the Regulator’s commenting tool. It is an important and revealing gap which I shall talk about more in the future.

This article explores why the unique environment inside an aircraft cabin demands a different approach to air quality standards than those used for ground-based indoor environments. It also highlights the challenges in regulation and offers insight into why this system of ‘regulation’ falls short of addressing the real risks.

What Are Fume Events and Why Do They Matter?

The air that you breathe on your flight is extracted from the air within the aircraft engine. Fume events occur when contaminated air enters the aircraft cabin, often due to leaks in the bleed air system that draws air from the engines. Those leaks usually occur during the transient stages of the flight, where the aircraft engine experiences different power ranges, along with the effects of changing pressure as the flight ascends or descends. As a result of those transient changes, the seals within the engine can suffer a less than optimal operation and synthetic oils used within the engine can leak into the air that is extracted through the bleed-air system. Another engine on the aircraft can also present similar leakages, this being the Auxiliary Power Unit or the APU, which is the small engine found in the tail of civil aircraft, which generally helps to power the aircraft whilst it is on the ground. Extracted air can carry synthetic oil, hydraulic fluids, or other re-combined chemicals, which may cause symptoms ranging from mild irritation to serious health problems for those exposed.

Passengers and aircrew have reported:

• Headaches;

• Dizziness,

• Respiratory issues;

• Skin Rashes;

• Sight problems, and

• Neuro-degenerative and Cognitive difficulties after experiencing fume events;

This list of adverse health effects is not intended to be exhaustive.

The difficulties that arise from the extraction of bleed-air can not only affect passengers and cabin crew, but importantly, pilots; this issue cuts into the very heart of the safe operation of your flight.

Subscribe now

A common question asked is how many events arise. That is a difficult question to answer because of the difficulty in establishing verifiable data. With that caveat, I cautiously present a recent survey I carried out, where I examined flight reports over 4 years. I concluded that some 1.29 flights were globally affected each week by fume events. Now that may not seem like a lot of flights, but I also estimated that my sample survey very likely only represents some 5% of verifiable fume event reports (there is a distinct possibility that this percentage figure may be lower, but I prefer to take a conservative approach where data is not widely available). If therefore my assumptions are correct, then this would suggest that some 25.8 flights are globally affected by fume events each week. By any measure, this strongly suggests that this is a flight safety issue of concern.

Why Current Aviation Standards Fall Short

The aviation industry and regulators will often rely on the mantra that the air onboard your flight is better than that found within your home or office. Industry will often speak to how the aircraft environment is created to mimic or represent the environment that you are used to experiencing in your home or at work. The problem however is that the solutions provided for the aircraft environment, is based on standards developed for indoor air quality in homes and offices to assess cabin air safety. These ground-based standards set thresholds for pollutants and contaminants based on environments at sea level and normal atmospheric pressure.

Share

By implication, the narrative avoids the very obvious point, that being that the aircraft environment is a unique environment and is quite distinct to that which you experience at ground level.

For example, the aircraft environment operates under very different conditions:

• It is a closed and sealed environment (there are some within the industry that claim that it is a semi-closed environment because it extracts breathable air from the aircraft engine);

• The aircraft operates at high altitude;

• That closed and sealed environment is subjected to altitude and pressure changes: Cabin pressure at cruise height is maintained at levels of between 6,000 to a maximum of 8,000 feet above sea level. But remember, that pressurisation begins at ground level and through the changes during the ascent and descent of the aircraft, these temperature & pressure changes can affect how chemicals behave and how the human body reacts;

• The aircraft environment, because it is a closed and sealed environment, undergoes an air recirculation process, exchanging 50% of breathable air every 3-5 minutes with the new air being introduced from the bleed-air system. The old air is jettisoned from the aircraft;

• Pressurisation is necessary to prevent the aircraft occupants from suffering with Hypoxia, Altitude Sickness, Decompression Sickness and Barotrauma – a factor that most of us do not have to contend with during our day-to-day lives on the ground.

It therefore is clear, the aircraft environment is unique and considering ground-based environments against it is in my opinion, incorrect.

Because of these factors, applying ground-based indoor air quality standards to aircraft cabins, ignores the unique risks and conditions within an aircraft and the recognition that despite the presence of HEPA filters on many aircraft, fume events and the various chemical compounds are still experienced during flights.

Implications for Regulation and Safety

Regulators, manufacturers, airline and engineers, must codesign regulations and a standard that are distinct and reflect these conditions rather than adapting ground-based models. This means:

• Accepting the unique nature of the aircraft;

• Working in partnership with Aviation Users;

• Presenting openness on the question of the constituents of synthetic oils, hydraulic fluids and other fluids or chemicals used on aircraft;

• Understanding the nature of these constituents and how they operate within a high temperature, variable pressured environments;

• Understanding the potential effect of such constituents on human health;

• Design testing models that are appropriate and produce better outcomes to assess the said effects on human health;

• Establish the correct comparator(s) for the aircraft environment, for example, other vehicles that operate within high pressurised environments (space vehicles, submarines etc);

• Embracing the Precautionary Principle;

• Reconsider the use of probability, a traffic light warning system, language surrounding the potential on failures and to create a new language that is not reliant on subjectivity but on data;

• In Europe, work to create a better and more appropriate Common European Risk Classification Scheme based on data and cooperation;

• Work in partnership and codesign on the question of Artificial Intelligence and the use of AI Systems which have the potential to be deployed within cabin air quality issues;

• Setting exposure limits based on the previous factors and the cabin pressure and altitude.

• Codesigning real-time air quality monitoring onboard;

• By codesign to adopt or create a comprehensive hierarchy of controls;

• By codesign creating filtration and ventilation systems specifically for aircraft environments;

• Mandating transparent reporting and investigation of fume events;

• Creating solidity in that reporting by protecting aircrew under current EU whistleblowing provisions;

• Outlawing penalties or other sanctions from being applied against aircrew where they become ill as a result of fume event;

• Both of the aforementioned issues relating to aircrew support the ‘Just Culture’ provision found within EU Regulation;

• To adopt or create a medical protocol for aircrew and passengers, for use by aviation medical professionals and state-based medical personnel;

• Accepting the principle of a passengers right to know and to receive assistance;

• By codesign to create and develop a distinct European Aviation Safety Programme/European Aviation Safety Plan specifically for Cabin Air Quality;

• By codesign to recognise the disparate nature of current EU Aviation ‘Regulation’ on Cabin Air Quality and to create unifying or harmonised ‘regulation’ that recognises all the factors contained within the points above.

Subscribe now

Moving Forward: What Needs to Change?

A couple of days ago, I attended the inaugural meeting of a newly formed APPG (All-Party Parliamentary Group) on Cabin Air Quality. It was almost 20 years since I first attended the UKs Parliament, meeting as I did with some very brave pilots and cabin crew. It introduced me to a new world, working as I did, and still do, with some remarkable activists.

As I listened to the presentations made by my colleagues, I marvelled at how far we had come, both in understanding and knowledge.

But it was the testimony of aircrew that was shocking. It would not be correct for me to share the detail of what they shared with me privately after the event concluded. The people I spoke with are highly professional; sad that their exposures to toxic fumes has prevented them from continuing to work in the industry that they love. The stories they shared with me about their treatment, was, despite the fact that I have heard similar tales, still shocking; the airlines of Europe should hang their heads in shame for what is done to what are clearly decent and honourable people. Their only crime, if it is indeed a commercial crime, was to raise concerns and unfortunately, suffer the health deficits arising from the problem stemming from the air supply into their working environment.

I have a demonstrable record on working with all sides of this debate and helping to achieve a consensus. But, apart from other issues I have highlighted in this article, the one thing that needs to change is the culture found within airlines, manufacturers and indeed, insofar as Europe is concerned, within parts of the Regulator and the European Commission. It is all very well to speak about ‘Just Culture’ or a ‘Safety Culture’, but, if one of the distinct problems we all face attaches to a ‘Collective Culture’ or a ‘Commercial Culture’, then progress will never be satisfied. My door has always been open; the same cannot always be said for some of the industrial or political actors in this debate.

However critical I am about an industrial or political culture; I am also critical of Consumers. For some 30 years I have been at the heart of Consumer Rights and arguing for improvements in policy and legislation. But I have a sense that there is only one thing that is important for Consumers when they take a flight and that is the cost of that flight; anything else appears to be almost irrelevant.

I have spoken with many consumers who have experienced aircraft fume events; some have been rendered unemployable. Those consumers have become vocal following their experiences but face difficulties with commercial entities, medical professionals and in some cases, legal representation. I have observed in recent years, the consumer of today is not the consumer of the 1990s. Consumers of today appear to not want to be inconvenienced, to pay the lowest possible price for their product and to want any solution to their problems to be swift (often through poor advices on social media), if indeed they seek a solution at all. If this is the ‘Consumer Culture’ of 2026, then it too needs to change, because the issue of cabin air quality is a real issue and could affect their next flight. The question is simply this: ‘Would you as a consumer accept a product that that presents a deficit?’ We can accept I hope that consumers would not; they would enquire and challenge and seek a solution. So if that is the case, do consumers not realise that they have immense power when it comes to aviation?

Imagine if consumers started to contact the airlines they intend to travel with and asked two simple questions (they could even ask the same questions of the regulator):

‘How many fume events have you experienced on your flights and how many have you reported to the regulator this year?’

‘How do you deal with fume events when they occur on your flights?’

Two simple questions that could lead you to making different financial choices; two questions that would make Regulators and the Industry sit up and listen.

That is how change begins!

(All rights reserved © 2026. This is the Article for ‘‘The Unique Challenges of Aircraft Cabin Air Quality and Fume Events”. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

In 1997, I began a journey through Travel, but not as you would think by visiting all the wonderful locations and places contained in holiday brochures. No, my journey was all about legally representing holidaymakers who had suffered all sorts of calamities, one of which was falling ill on holiday. I joined a law firm’s enterprising department, to find that we had some 1,000 clients on our books and in a matter of months, this swelled to some 15,000 holidaymakers affected by illness on their holidays.

The destinations that their claims came from ranged from Margarita Island, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, Majorca, the Costa del Sol and Tenerife.

There was no doubt that these holidaymakers were not taking any nonsense from Travel Companies and sought to exercise their Consumer Rights; oh how the majority of settee-complaining Consumers of the 2020s could learn from those determined individuals!

Subscribe now

A political voice for holiday health

By 2000, I had left all those cases behind but within a few short years, I was back at the helm of problematic travel issues, but this time working as a Consumer Advocate both socially and politically.

It was a different route through which to try and resolve these problems.

When I was dealing with legal cases, it was simply a matter of preparing each individual case and meeting up with Travel Company travel lawyers to thrash out a settlement or to prepare the case for a court hearing.

Politically, it was a different type of work – it was all about taking the Consumer story into the heart of politics, to the decision-makers, and to secure dialogue and improvement in the laws that affected holiday transactions.

But part of that role was to also analyse and establish a commentary about the kind of serious ethical and other problems that Consumers could face with their travel choices.

Share

The typical holiday illness response

Many of the travel company responses to holiday illnesses usually delivered a watering down of the problem or a flat denial – sometimes they claimed it was down to a ‘change in the climate’, ‘sensitive UK diets’, ‘a virus’, and in situe, travel representatives walking around pools shouting ‘code brown’ causing people to leave the pool, only to return a short time later after some chemicals had been added to the ‘code brown’ pool; as many holidaymakers told me, they felt that their safety was being demoted by a humour and the bare minimum.

By comparison, the holidaymakers stories presented a very different picture.

The evidence we extracted from holidaymakers presented sheer numbers of complaints that told a story of poorly cooked food, raw meats presented as ‘well done’, flies, cockroaches, vomit-walkways and swimming pools, many suffering with illnesses, some attached to hydration drips in hotels or medical centres, along with the poor help from travel companies and some questionable medical reports from resorts.

As we travelled into the noughties, the so-called travel-media/moral-outrage articles claimed, through a very determined media campaign, that many of these holiday illness claims were fraudulent. It did have an effect upon holidaymakers wanting to complain or pursue an action because many did not want to be associated with the oft-used phrase of being part of a ‘compensation-culture’.

But in my discussions with the Ministry of Justice at the time, we could not see how the media claims were supported by the actual facts – I offered to the Ministry that if there was indeed a rump of Consumers seeking to fraudulently claim, then it was very likely to account for less than 1% of all package holidays taken; there was no disagreement in the room.

The cost of returning holiday illness

Back in 2006, I was determined to look at the whole issue of returning holiday illness and its continuing cost once Consumers had returned to the UK.

I wanted to know if there was indeed a continuing cost, its extent and what those actual costs meant to the public or social purse; it was a simple question: “Was returning holiday illness being supported by the taxpayer and by individual pockets?”.

The basis of that study was to establish the true effect of self-contained or long term illness due to contracting a notifiable disease. In establishing that true effect I realised that I had to focus on the UKs National Health Service, the cost to Insurers, medical costs, lost time and production at work.

The methodology deployed centred around the known numbers of package holidaymakers but wanting to be scrupulously fair, the numbers of individuals and types of illnesses along with time taken off work was heavily discounted, providing a baseline figure for the actual costs I was seeking to establish.

Subscribe now

The result was quite shocking.

Bearing in mind that these calculations were carried out in 2006, the overall cost at the time (which did not include calculations on State Benefits or work carried out by Environmental Health Officers), was £111m.

Of that figure, the cost the UKs National Health Service was £12m, the cost to British Industry was £74m, the cost to the Insurance Industry was £19m and the personal cost to holidaymakers was £6.3m.

If we recalculate that into 2026 values, that overall cost now equates to £194m

Is there any such thing as holiday illness today?

Even though I have now moved away from providing day-to-day generic travel commentaries in the media, I can see quite clearly that holidaymakers are still complaining about the very issues that many of the 1990s holidaymakers spoke about.

The difference is that the noughties Consumer complains across the social media platforms and appear to do very little else to resolve their serious complaints. Media commentators and certainly influencers rarely comment on the conditions of the destinations or hotels, if at all. But such actions or lack of actions presents a very different set of issues that attracts its own ethics and problems to resolve.

In the meantime, holiday illness pervades and with it, all the implications that affects the finances of the returning country.

We can see this through the recent news of returning holiday illnesses to the UK from the Cape Verde islands. It is clear that there have been outbreaks of illness in resorts which have included notifiable diseases such as Shigella & Salmonella. Overall the illnesses have caused significant health problems with some UK holidaymakers tragically dying after returning home.

It all reminds me of those early cases from the Caribbean!

Share

The Ethics of Holiday Illness

The Cape Verde situation raises broader serious ethical questions about travel practices, the responsibilities of travel companies, and the wider effects on families and society; it strongly suggests that the location of illness is not the last word on that illness or a set of illnesses.

The argument I made in 2006 must surely follow 20 years later that if once the holidaymakers deboard their flight in the UK, does the responsibility of a travel company end there?

The ethics of a company clearly starts from the production of a travel brochure or an invitation to buy their holidays. They should represent that safety is truly paramount, evidenced by documentation and processes that demonstrate that your holiday will be safe.

In the late 1990s, this very point came to the fore because of the sheer volume of holiday complaints. In fairness to the travel industry, there were companies and individuals who worked hard to create systems and processes, and a completely new attitude to the delivery of a safe product – that was a commercial ethic in practice.

But on return, I have always been left with a sense that some travel companies believe that their responsibility is over. But whatever their corporate position on this issue, that cannot be the case. It cannot be the case because in the face of their provable liability, their failures are supported by the non-recovery of National Health costs, travel insurance costs and the cost to British Industry and therefore tax receipts from those employed.

It is highly arguable therefore, that those travel companies, responsible for those holiday complaints are receiving a State and Business Aid, whatever about the personal costs borne by individual holidaymakers.

In short, we, the taxpayers, the business-owners and we as individuals are being asked to foot the bill!. This situation exists because of the lack of connectivity to these relationships. The onward consequences is that be it through a health system, business or our own pockets, financial decisions are being made as a result of those losses or diversion of funds, that affects the operations of those entities and of course, our own personal finances. Importantly, in terms of health delivery, there is an obvious ethical and moral question arising from money or resources being diverted to deal with the outcome of a holiday product, to the detriment of those who may not be able to benefit from those resources for other medical conditions.

Travel Companies may argue that their recourse to action will be against those hotels and destinations for their failures, but, if the ethics and representations made in contracts do not deliver for the Consumer, whomever makes the representation on safety, it begs the question about how the Consumer and their spend on the product is being considered. It also raises the important question about the ethicality of resorts and their governing tourism authorities about how their see the actual travel product beyond the aerosol buzz-word of sustainability.

How can the Ethics of Holiday Illness be improved?

It is remarkable in some ways that nearly 30 years later, I have returned to the very issue that started my travel journey. Whilst I shall leave generic travel commentary to others, I believe that the time is ripe to revisit the whole issue of ethics and responsibility on the important issue of holiday illness. I consider that it is imperative that as a country:

• We recognise the cost of returning holiday illness to a Nation;

• That we accept that such a returning cost strongly suggests that the effects of those illnesses are delivering a State, Business and Personal support or aid to companies who are responsible for these failures – this is an informal or unspoken support or aid that is being delivered;

• To import where we recognise or become aware of serious illnesses arising from holidays, the important ethical and moral question(s) of how deteriorating health and safety issues can be allowed to arise or to continue without the direct input, direction and control by the destination and returning States;

• Fundamentally, we must ask questions about the race-to-the-bottom holiday prices and their effects on how such ‘market forces’ contribute or not contribute to staff training, union membership, decent wages, working hours, living conditions, the quality of food or swimming pool water, sustainability of product etc – this must surely be the most important ethical consideration (must travel volume be king - is it the real driver of economic growth; does it create detriment?)?

• Shouldn’t there be a requirement to import internationally recognised sustainable principles and objectives into contracts between B2B and B2C to deliver safe products over and above regulations that protect Consumers?

I have no doubt that the issues of ethics in holidays will not fill the column inches of UK newspapers, but, as ethics and sustainability continue to feature, despite the efforts of some, we can perhaps determine and understand the very nature of individual and corporate responsibility and the ethic that must travel with it. If we fail to do so, then the very travel and tourism product will fail to deliver on the very important benefits to destination countries and reputations will be damned! The future of ethical sustainability is in our hands; it is our responsibility.

(All rights reserved © 2026. This is the Article for ‘‘The ethics of returning Holiday Illnesses to the UK”. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

Share

As you can see from that description, apart from the general fluffery and range of travel commentaries, you would have to be pretty disconnected to not recognise that the world of Travel is primarily political, but it’s also about ethics.

There were many occasions when in discussion about some difficult security situation , I would have to highlight the issue of how politics played an important role in the world of travel. For example, after the Tunisian beach massacre of holidaymakers in 2015, there was a narrative offered by authorities and government, seeking to normalise the issue of travel, by encouraging holidaymakers to return to their country, to deliver an act of defiance that terror will never win and that it would help a destination to recover. The problem with that argument was the fact that some destinations had a pretty poor record on human rights or on the delivery of democratic principles but even with these deficits, terror and the killing of maiming of people was never acceptable. And the voice of encouragement sometimes came from our own government, the UK media and from within the Travel Industry. Those opposing such calls made statements that from within those destinations, governments were seeking to deliver holidaymakers who were to be considered as ‘foot-soldiers in the war against terror’[1]perhaps suggesting that commercial interests were encouraging and taking the chance of delivering Consumers into a highly risky consumer transaction.

For my part, as I navigated terror attacks and problems with destinations, I described how Travel was the ultimate expression of positive relations that existed between countries, where values, respect for each other’s cultures, the exchange of, through travel, of each other’s citizens, to learn about each other, and how respect for international norms and laws and human rights underpinned the relations between countries. Travel was the ultimate expression of those relations; the ultimate benefit of any trade agreement.

That’s what I believe and continue to believe, despite the arrival of one Donald J Trump on the scene of what is now generally accepted and recognised as the Gaza Genocide.

Subscribe now

As I’ve watched events unfurl, I can see that Trump and those that support him, represent the audacity of ignorance.

But audacity aside, flowing from ignorance is the breath-taking planned ambition of returning to a time when nostalgia for a world long-since forgotten, supported by false narratives and disdain for the post-1945 Institutions, are the objectives. Their watch-words are: ‘might is right’, and ‘justice is transactional’.

At the end of May 2025, I asked the question: ‘Tourism and a genocide; a time to decide?’. In that article, I wrestled with my conscience over what I was witnessing each day; dystopian images were filling our screens and social feeds. Another part of the article spoke to the silence of travel commentaries and how the time had come to take a position; to encourage Consumers to also take a position on the choice they would make on travel.

But the words of one travel commentator are no match for the Trumpian machine which many months ago declared that they had created a ceasefire and a peace plan to be instituted by his ‘Board of Peace’. In the first instance, there is no peace in Gaza and for that matter, on the West Bank. Reports from Gaza highlight shootings of Palestinians, flooding, a failure to deliver aid; a corralling of an entire peoples as the lines of peace are moved to suit the victors.

But the recent meeting in Davos provided a real insight into ‘what happens next’ in Gaza and perhaps the West Bank. Trump launched the ‘Board of Peace’ to great applause, surrounded by world-leaders willing to sign onto the ticket and pay the $1bn for a lifetime membership – the leaders sitting on the podium were not exactly fine examples of political leadership. Trump also launched with great fanfare his logo which is not too dissimilar to the UNs logo, distinctive because of its hues of gold and how the USA and the American continent feature predominantly at its centre.

The Charter of the Board of Peace provides for interesting reading, creating as it does a lifetime position for Trump as its Chair, a conditional statement that it ‘may’ create accounts ‘as necessary to carry out its mission’, and,

“The Chairman, acting on behalf of the Board of Peace, is authorized to adopt resolutions or other directives, consistent with this Charter, to implement the Board of Peace’s mission”.

The European Council of Foreign Relations has extended its own warning that the Board:

“…has less to do with peace, in Gaza or elsewhere, and more to do with enforcing a new, transactional global order. Welcome to the America-First Trumpian world”; providing as it does a warning to Europe and the operation of International Law.

But as the glitz was being played out in Davos, it was one image that demonstrated the future that awaits Gaza and perhaps other conflict areas around the world, that come under the sphere and of Trump’s corporate dreams.

Share

The Board of Peace slide was entitled ‘New Gaza’.

The slide was divided into 3 zones: Coastal Tourism, Transportation Hub, and Energy & Digital Infrastructure.

The image for ‘Coastal Tourism’ presented a futuristic vision of multiple skyscrapers and marinas nestled along the Gazan coastline – the very same coastline where businesses and homes have been obliterated, featuring the never to be forgotten scenes of thousands upon thousands of men, women and children walking across the broken roads, sand dunes and beaches in a vain effort to return to their homes.

The third image for ‘Energy & Digital Infrastructure’ reveals so much more.

When I saw the image, I confess I was puzzled. Whenever I visited this region, I had not seen any of the apparatus associated with oil or gas extraction. But as I discovered, there is a substantial amount of oil under the West Bank and just off the coast of Gaza, is the presence of a vast natural gas field. The knowledge of the presence of fossils fuels within these areas, has been known for many years. Logically, the Palestinians could benefit from the currency earned from their extraction, but conflict has prevented that bonanza for the Palestinians. Conflict has not prevented the government of Israel from issuing licences for extraction in the region.

Subscribe now

Another aspect associated with the ‘Board of Peace’ slides was the announcement by the UAE to create the first ‘planned community’ in southern Gaza. A slide presentation demonstrated the plan for this new residential area. New housing is set out in geometric blocks. Education will begin with ‘Emergency Studies’ based on the curriculum of the UAE. Access to education, healthcare and water will only be given if the residents, following vetting, submit to the collection of biometric information. To prevent what is deemed to be the influence of Hamas, daily finances and money will be delivered through the use of financial digital wallets.

And not one word is heard from the Palestinians or the Palestinian Authority. It seems that the dreams of Palestinian Statehood is now but a distant memory.

In light of what has happened to millions of Palestinians, the creation of a new riviera on the eastern Mediterranean must surely be not only immoral, but contrary to International Law and of the many motions passed by the UN.

As the world is clearly engaged in a struggle to understand what all of this means for our futures, one thing is certain; we have become participants in that future, anything less is an abdication.

While we may like to celebrate in the glory and functioning of our own democracies, it is the complacency of our democracies and indeed ourselves that has allowed the opening of the political Pandora’s Box, just as we did in the 20^th Century.

The immorality and failure of political and corporate ethics, raises important questions for our own ethic and the financial decisions we make about how we spend our money on leisure.

As I consider more broadly the ethics of travel, I find that I am disappointed that there is no apparent evidence that Travel Commentators, Influencers & Travel Vloggers are vocal on one of the greatest travel ethical stories of this century, content it seems to sell Consumers the false dream of travel, rather than its ethics, realities and challenges; (not helped by the silence found on the World Tourism Organisation, now UN Tourism’s, website). Surely the Consumer currency has influence?

If and when the corporate dream of ‘Coastal Tourism’ is delivered as modelled, without any justice for ordinary Palestinians and their dream of an independent state, our own ethics and morality should refuse to support such an enterprise because it will have been borne out of blood and what a true and just peace should look like. We all know what a just peace looks like, and don’t say that you don’t; all we need is courage to say enough and no more.

(All rights reserved © 2026. This is the Podcast & Article for ‘‘‘New Gaza’: International Travel & the Audacity of Ignorance”. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany. Images © 2026 ‘Board of Peace’).

[1] I can no longer find the link to the article where the phrase was used by a UK Journalist

For most people I speak with, they assume that when I speak about cabin air quality, it is about the staleness of the air, or the humidity or the smell of fuels coming into the aircraft whilst it is at the airport.

They are often surprised when I explain the nature of how you receive the air that you breathe on a flight, and how the technology is challenged by air pressure and the operations of the aircraft. That challenge can sometimes deliver synthetic oils or fluids into the atmosphere onboard. This potential exposure to a range of chemical compounds can have a serious impact on human health. It is that aspect that forms the basis of our work and the content of the standard, designed we hope, to create a safer cabin air environment.

Subscribe now

In the course of all the discussions I have been involved in, both in the USA and within the EU, the conversation also has to follow the route to other risks or potential sources.

Yesterday was no different.

We were examining several sources of risk, one of which was the potential problem of lithium-ion batteries.

It became clear during the course of the conversation that there were some US Federal guidelines for airlines on how to manage an overheated device or one that had actually caught fire. As we did, I was reminded of the recent fire onboard an Air China flight, which the airline stated, that it had arose due the sudden combustion of a passenger’s lithium-ion device. As you look at the film, you can see how quickly the fire was taking hold during the flight, creating smoke, heat and no doubt other fumes arising from the breakdown of plastics, whatever about the clear distress of the passengers and the risk to the flight.

As we spoke about this particular issue and the potential risk to cabin air quality and the obvious risk to the flight, we began to talk about the actions that could be taken by crew or airlines and realised that action was reliant on airlines following those guidelines. I quickly researched the European Union’s Executive Agency for aviation regulation, EASA. I found that they had issued a Safety Information Bulletin (SIB) which essentially recognises the growing rate of incidents and risks and provided a must-do list for airline operators to institute!

In our discussions, one of my colleagues highlighted the infographic presented by an online booking process about carrying dangerous items onboard. Within that infographic there was a prohibited sign for lithium-ion devices for checked-in baggage!

It provided some mirth within the group discussion when I revealed, me being the ‘Consumer Champion’, that whilst I had seen such infographics during recent flight bookings, I had not been particularly attracted to the lithium-ion device prohibition – I clearly hadn’t paid enough attention. That I offered, is how the vast majority of Consumers will view such information; another hurdle to tick the box and on in their journey to complete the booking process!

And this is an important point because as in the EASA SIB, they point to the airline having to make sure that the passenger has sufficient information about the risks.

Share

As we discussed how information should be imparted to Consumers, a colleague spoke about the need for more information at the departure gate. They highlighted a comparison in how on one recent flight, when they were checking in their baggage at the check-in desk, they were asked 3 times if they had any lithium-ion devices within their checked-in baggage. However, as I pointed out, the majority of passengers enter the airport, go straight to security and arrive at their gate – no-one has a discussion about what they are carrying, except perhaps for security at the airport, but they are looking at different issues.

On that latter point, I suggested that because of security rules, we as passengers are required to travel with charged devices. As a matter of habit, I suggested that most passengers will ensure that their devices are charged at 100%. I spoke about my old phone which had a poor battery retention and required regular charging and sometimes became quite hot; how many onboard would be likely to have such a device?

On the point of the level of battery charge in a pressurised environment, one colleague spoke to how lithium-ion devices, being carried as cargo, had to have a maximum charge of 60%. The issue of the transportation of lithium-ion powered devices is clearly causing concern within the commercial cargo industry, who are looking for action by ICAO, rather than nation states creating a hotchpotch set of regulations. Descriptive phrases like “[Devices] battery-powered vehicles” is to be replaced by, “[Devices] vehicles powered by lithium batteries”, which the industry argues will “allow operators to undertake a more granular safety risk assessment to consider the particular hazard posed by these vehicles”. Along with these concerns are the new rules apparently being introduced to reflect the changing commercial cargo landscape in which that ‘Devices’ or “Vehicles” when being transported by air can only have a maximum State of Charge (SoC) of 30% from 1^st January 2026.

That’s an interesting commentary because when we come back to the security issue of having your devices charged and how we maximise that to 100% and measured against the generally unseen ’warnings’ given to passengers about dangerous goods, there are no evident requirements on the passenger on the maximum State of Power (SoC) they can bring onboard for their devices!

Subscribe now

It seems to me that if you need cooperation from the passenger, information and regulatory obligations on that passenger should be complementary to the airlines obligations? That would reflect perhaps the concerns and way the air cargo industry carries and packs such items? Or is it simply the case that for our convenience, airlines have to become more responsible for our personal consumables, without consumer obligations or a greater awareness? There is an inequality on this issue and consumers should remember that to be lucky enough to travel means that you should be aware of and take control of your responsibilities!

This led all me to question; what were the general standards for lithium-ion batteries? There are two important international standards, the IEC & the UN. But these are purely for creating testing and producing the lithium-ion & other product’s, and in the one standard, the test was a ground-based altitude low-pressure test.

This is all very well, and apart from laboratory testing and modelling, do we actually know how the consumer’s daily used, actual product, performs at high altitude and pressure? Or is it the case, as we mostly see, within the contaminated cabin air quality field, the issue is simply reliant on laboratories and modelling, rather than using a range of real world products to understand the problem? Doesn’t the range and frequency of incidents require a better route to data and understanding, whatever about a uniform international regulation?

From my perspective, this is a technology that is outpacing aviation regulation.

Risks and controls are left to guidance or standards, including the one we were working on. I suggested that we were left with a difficult landscape and that I had sympathy for airlines who have to deal with this potential problem and risk – it is after all, about their bottom line.

The responsibility I suggested rested with ICAO and National or trans-National Regulators.

For the purpose of our Standard we could only suggest, that as part of the suggested solutions we provided, airlines should consider delivering ‘dynamic information’ to passengers, however that may be defined (it is important to state that the work on this part of the standard prevents us from providing requirements). This I argued could reduce a potential risk to a flight, because as Consumers, we too are part of the security compact, and if you don’t think that is the case, then perhaps you shouldn’t be taking flights!

So if you are wondering, what are the kind of devices you may carry onboard that contain lithium-ion batteries? Before you depart to the airport, you will probably pack your smartphone, tablet, laptop, toothbrush, charging pack, children’s game machines, headphones, music ear-pieces, the list is not unlimited. And I would suggest, as you pack them, ask yourself the question(s), how old is my device; does it get hot; can I afford to take the risk?

Whilst our primary purpose was to speak about contaminated aircraft cabin air, I suggested that in considering other sources, we have to acknowledge the potential risk of exposure to contaminants arising from those sources, as we saw in the recent flight-fire.

If we assume that each passenger carries 3 devices with lithium-ion batteries in their cabin baggage, then multiply that risk by 200 passengers, all carrying old or new devices, how is the risk quantified, isn’t it an important flight safety issue that ICAO and other Regulators should grasp with some urgency?

If they did, I am certain that airlines would welcome those outcomes, despite the obligations that such measures would impose on them and I hope Consumers, against the potential loss of an aircraft and all of those onboard!

(All rights reserved © 2025. This is the Article for ‘‘Aircraft Cabin Air Quality and the risks of Lithium-ion Batteries”. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

Subscribe now

The roll-out for the EES has had many false starts, principally over the technology and whether EU countries will be ready to implement this important change. When the UK was a member state of the EU, they were one of the member states who helped to co-design the EES, but of course upon Brexit, that co-design activity ceased.

Changes to borders and the security of borders has been in sharp focus since 11 September 2001. As the years have passed, holidaymakers and travellers around the world have had direct experience of those changes. For UK holidaymakers, not only have they had to contend with the extra searches (including changes in technology), but also liquid rules which are now being slowly replaced by new rules stemming from that technology, to passport requirements because the UK left the EU.

The EES should be seen in the context in which it was created and the scale of the operation for its implementation. A good example of context is found through the experience of many UK Holidaymakers who have travelled to the USA. They have been required to apply for a travel authorisation via an ESTA and upon arrival either at pre-clearance departure points or when they arrive in the USA, have been subject to the USA’s own entry/exit system. So whilst UK holidaymakers have travelled to the USA in their hundreds of thousands, I have not detected any complaints from Consumers about their border experiences through these specific requirements.

But, if you are to read the UK’s media you would firmly believe that the arrival of the EES delivers a further detriment to the UK. According to some commentaries, the UK appears to be suffering from a continued victim syndrome following the UK’s decision to leave the EU; those dastardly EU bureaucrats are at it again! Those same commentaries, through their forensic analysis behind their victim-type headlines, also claim that second-home owners face being banned or kicked-out by the EU, because of the EES. But, behind the headlines there lurks another story, one that extends beyond the EES, that being the right to stay in an EU country beyond the permitted a visa-free period of 90 days in every 180 days – the period applied to all citizens of third-party countries, which of course the UK now is. We learn from these articles that there are those Brits living on the Costa’s who are apparently flouting this permitted visa-free period and are now uncertain about what to do.

Through muscular articles, we have also been entertained by the predictions of longer waiting times at EU borders, thereby adding to the ‘victim’ status that they want you, the Consumer, to subscribe to.

Subscribe now

So, let’s be clear:

• Should we expect some delays? Yes.

• Should we get to airports much earlier than what is currently being advised? You should follow the guidance given to you by your travel company, airline or airport, not what you read on social media or the newspapers.

• What kind of delays should we expect? It’s a new system; remember when the e-passport channels were introduced and how the technology didn’t always work?

• Will things go wrong? Of course they will; every new system, no matter how many times it’s been tested will deliver flaws in real-time operations.

• How is the EU introducing the EES? Slowly! The full roll-out is not expected to be fully operational until April 2026. Countries are expected to gradually implement these requirements, but there are also rules that allow border officials to suspend or change the method by which you enter the EU area in the event that a location becomes overwhelmed.

As for the commentary that the EU is threatening UK second-home owners, and I say this specifically to UK Spanish home-owners, because that appears to be the demographic focus of some media, you know what the rules are! You know what you must comply with. You know how to apply for long-stay or permanent visas. Unless you like being led by the nose, you are not a victim. You have chosen to invest your hard-earned cash in an EU country, and yes, the reality of when you bought your property has changed, but your presence, the money you spend in your chosen location, is valued, along with the choice that you have made. The media who are painting you as victims do not.

When I look at this and the broader commentary about the implementation of the EES, it is like watching spectres at the banquet, where the gallery attempts to displace their own fears & loathing into the mind-set of UK holidaymakers. Like everything in life, be careful not to be consumed by the clickbait of a media commentary or the lure of an AI masterpiece on travel.

As I have said in my own commentary about the arrival of the EES: be informed, prepare and as you have done many times before, bring your resilience to the airport because I know you will understand the need for these security changes and whether you realise it or not, you too are a stakeholder in the canvas that is airport security and border requirements.

(All rights reserved © 2025. This is the Article for ‘The Lamentable Outrage of the EU’s Entry/Exit System’. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), with the exception of the Substack platform for that platform’s use only, in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany)

Each month I shall write about the trends and news in travel in the UK and within the EU. Hopefully I shall help you to fathom the issues, problems and joys of getting away for your holidays! For many years I have dealt with the warts and all that is travel; I discuss the travel issues that others tend to avoid!

Subscribe now

But before you dive in, please read my important caveat at the end of my newsletter!

Headline Travel News:

Top News: The Arrival of EES & eventually, ETIAS:

After many years of design and delay the European Union’s EES or Entry & Exit System (EU) starts to operate on 12 October 2025. This is an important date for Consumers to remember because when you enter the EU area, coming from a 3^rd party country (the UK is a 3^rd party country following Brexit), you will be required to provide your fingerprints, be photographed and to be able to answer important questions about for example, Travel Insurance, available funds and whether you have a return ticket. Roll-out is gradual but by April 2026, it will be fully operational. This process should not be a surprise to the UK; we helped design the system before Brexit and many UK holidaymakers will be familiar with such a system when they travel to the USA. I’ve noted that there’s lots of media froth and fizz out there about the arrival of the EES; in another one of my Substack articles, I provide comment and further guidance/see my Substack page for comment & guidance which you may find helpful

On the horizon and following hot on the heels of the EES will be the introduction of the EU’s electronic visa system ETIAS – the EU’s visa-free Travel Authorisation (similar to the USA’s ESTA), is expected to now come into operation in the last quarter of 2026. It will cost Consumers €20 and is valid for 3 years or until your passport expires if that expiry is before the end of the 3 years. There are payment exemptions. It will simply reflect the current reality that as a UK Citizen you have visa-free travel in the EU for 90 days in any 180 day period. At this point you do not need to do anything, but, from Autumn 2026 you should be aware of this entry requirement, which is in addition to the requirements of the EES system and certainly by 2027, UK holidaymakers will require an electronic visa to enter the EU.

I’ve noted that there are websites out there that are speaking to these issues. Be aware of any requests for money once ETIAS becomes ‘live’ – you do not have to pay for the service of obtaining an ETIAS as you will be able to obtain your ETIAS via the Europa sites, the links I have provided in this section.

Travelling to the USA:

For many years I have not avoided talking about the potential of a risk or set of risks to holidaymakers that have or indeed may present themselves in the destinations they choose to travel to.

In the past I have spoken to such risks in Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Egypt and in more recent times, the risks that can arise from natural weather events or phenomena. So, it is with regret, that following many concerns directly expressed to me and those arising within the public domain, I must speak about the issue of travel to the USA.

Since the beginning of 2025 there has been growing concerns about USA rhetoric, or whether you will be able to enter the USA (with real concerns expressed about social media commentary)(this article reveals monitoring capability), or more recently, the potential concerns on personal safety due to the rising tensions in the USA, particularly with cities being subjected to increased military/policing activity (note the presidential decree on domestic terrorism).

It would be wholly irresponsible of me as a travel commentator to ignore these concerns; I am not a travel brochure or influencer, paid or otherwise, for any destination. Destinations and their governments should guard the jewel in their crown that is tourism and not create the conditions that makes travel potentially untenable, and they should not be surprised if a public discussion ensues following their actions.

On exploring these issues carefully, and on the issue of personal checks into the USA, the FCDO (the UK’s Foreign Office) Travel Advisory states:

“Officials may ask to inspect your electronic devices, emails, text messages, and social media activity. If you refuse, they can delay or deny your entry”.

To balance any concerns you may have, I have noted that the US Customs & Borders states such searches apply to less than 1% of entries.

I have always suggested to Consumers that before deciding to travel to any holiday destination, they should not only take heed of the UKs FCDO Travel Advisories, but that they should also look at what neighbouring EU countries are advising their own citizens – then compare and contrast those advices with the FCDO – if you are still concerned, then speak with your travel company!

I’ve noted that EU countries have strengthened their own travel advisories with regards to entry problems, particularly for the LGBTQ+ communities; this is a vulnerable travel community and I would suggest extra care is deployed when assessing entry requirements.

It is absolutely vital that before you book travel to the USA, or, once you have booked and indeed just before you travel and I’d recommend that whilst you are travelling in the USA, that you research all aspects of travel advisories and maintain that research, including information coming from the US Government. Equally, keeping abreast of the news both nationally and within the State that you will be travelling to will also increase your knowledge about what is happening. Importantly, when deciding to travel to the USA, not only should you ensure that you have a valid comprehensive Travel Insurance Policy, but ensure that you have full cover for the USA, noting any exemptions relating to public disorder or entry into the USA – make sure you have legal cover in case you need urgent advices.

If you have concerns about the entry process into the USA, one way which may resolve and mitigate those concerns (you should seek further advices if you have concerns taking this route), is to travel (with a travel company or airline) via Dublin, where there is a USA pre-clearance centre in the terminal; at least you would be potentially on the right side of the pond in the event you encounter any difficulties. Even though I’ve hesitated highlighting this potential route, I’ve noted that the US Pre-Clearance area in Dublin Airport remains Irish Territory. Your rights as a Passenger in Dublin Airport can be found in Sections 3 & 4 of Ireland’s Aviation (Preclearance) Act 2009 – noting also caveats in Sections 5 & 6).

The simple message is to continually monitor the situation and always seek advice if in doubt – do not speculate your way to an answer on your individual situation!

Whatever the reality, it struck me as somewhat perverse, that in the ‘land of the free and the home of the brave’, in a country that I have visited on several occasions, that it should become obsessed with the critical opinions we express online or indeed how we describe ourselves and use these to judge us as individuals, or for our free choices to be regarded as threats to the nation-state.

In the glare of glossy brochures and advertisements, perhaps we should not be looking at the USA through rose-tinted spectacles? We need perhaps to pay heed to the words and actions spoken in the country and consider them against the risk that we are prepared to tolerate as individuals?

In the end, it is all about Consumer perception; if a country creates risk or the potential for risk, don’t be surprised if holidaymakers from the UK decide to travel elsewhere, and certainly don’t be surprised if a Travel Commentator guides those Consumers on how to manage such risks, real or otherwise!

In other News:

Convent Summers & Gen Z:

I really liked this story and decided that it would be good to share an interesting and I would say positive travel story.

A new social-media trend has arisen during the summer of 2025. Gen-Z is apparently seeking peace and silence in religious convents – the suggestion is that it has equivalence to the 1967 ‘Summer of Love’! Apparently it’s about travelling to cooler temperatures and disconnecting, both digitally and otherwise from the world. Guests can, in some locations, enjoy up to 4 ‘Holy Hours’ of silence. You can work in the garden, help with the ‘industry’ of the order, paint, engage in pottery and so on. I don’t necessarily think this is a new idea; convents and monasteries have for centuries offered their properties to travellers as potential places to stay. But in the crowded and noisy market of travel, it is something different. It may not float your boat, but it could sit within your bucket travel list? It seems that some convents offer stays for free, a fixed fee or a donation – here’s a list of fee paying options around Europe.

Tourism Protests:

I make no apologies for returning to this issues; you may have seen me comment on Climate and Tourism in my other Substack articles or through the social media. I believe that as Consumers we should not be sticking our heads in the sand, whatever about the rhetoric of the current crop of politicians, wherever you may live!

Tourism Protests have continued through the 2025 summer season (Palma, Naples, Venice, Barcelona, Canaries). These protests have arisen in recent years simply because the people who live in our ‘favourite’ destinations have had enough. The central themes to these protests centre around the effects of Climate Change and the Sustainability of the Travel Product. On the latter point, that sustainability refers to the effective consequence of Tourism which is overcrowding. Some refer to their homes and the place where they live as being colonised by Tourism. Day-to-day matters of concern relate to availability of homes, high rents, pressure on utilities, pollution, in some cases, hotel staff having to live in tents, caravans or unfinished buildings.

The current debate on Mallorca, offered by one travel company is that Package Holidaymakers provide a lesser impact on the destination than DIY holidaymakers! Other themes on the island reflect concerns on the lack of housing for locals due to tourism along with a call for alternative tourist models.

Mallorca is no stranger to these protests which also includes deep concerns about the explosive growth of rental properties, the impact on overtourism offered by the increased schedules of low-cost airlines, revenge tourism (this is the oddly phrased media contribution which labels the rise of tourism following the COVID19 pandemic), along with the gentrification of whole areas, so removing unique shops, bars, craftspeople towards the comfort-zone and needs of tourists.

Whilst the UK media deliver a regular ‘it’s not fair’, or ‘We’re doing them a favour by travelling to their country’ narrative, the fundamental issues are not going away until the Industry and the politicians in these destinations actually bring sense and balance to a product that many think is now out of control.

I would say to intending holidaymakers, do not be concerned by the potential for protests; many of the protestors are happy you are visiting their country, all they are trying to do is to seek change for themselves and indeed changes to the travel product which in turn will be better for you. Do not be seduced by a media outrage. In the end, choices will have to be made, including by us, the Consumer!

My top tips of where to go:

Extreme Day Trips:

Even though it has been spoken of as a new phenomenon, the truth is that certainly since the 1980s, UK holidaymakers have been taking day trips to their favourite destinations in Europe. Upon receiving the challenge from some media outlets, I was asked to demonstrate the art of the possible in 2025.

I have accepted the challenge, with the following criteria: The maximum flight time is 2 hours (small slippage’s are allowed); I seek the first flight of the day; I pre-plan everything I want to see in that destination; I take the last flight back on that day; I have to be prepared to be flexible for my return airport and finally, I always take out climate change offset contribution (yes, it is controversial, but I prefer to suggest this action to place in the mind of holidaymakers the consequences of their travel decisions – an average off-set cost should be in the region of about £20pp.

This month I suggest a day trip to Bologna:

I found this a difficult challenge because of the scarcity of departures from UK regional airports (online flight consolidators suggested routing through some EU airports making the average flight anywhere between 8 hours and 12 hours – a non-starter).

I found a flight departing from London Heathrow LHR (BA). I booked a return ticket with the outward departure leaving on Tuesday 28 October 2025, at 08.25hrs with a return departure at 18.40hrs (the flight time is stated to be 2 hours 15 mins, but flights to this region are often 2 hours or less). The cost for this flight was £228.62pp with small under seat bags – this gives you a potential of a good 6 hours in Bologna. However, I found a flight (small bag under the seat in front of you), Thursday 30 October 2025, Ryanair, from London Stansted. Departing at 07.05hrs and a return departure at 21.55hrs (flight time to be stated at 2hrs, 20 minutes, but again, flights to this region are often 2hrs or less), giving you a whopping 8/9 hours to explore Bologna. As with all things with flight only arrangements – build in redundancy: what if the flight is cancelled, what can I do, what are my rights; a good place to start is with EU Regulation 261/2004 & make sure you have Travel Insurance!

From the airport to the centre of Bologna, there is an Airport Monorail (Marconi Express) which takes 7 minutes to get into the city centre (currently €23.30 pp for a return ticket).

Once in Bologna you have to explore its Piazzas (Maggiore), UNESCO arcades, Cassini Sundial (World’s largest), the Memorial to the Fallen Partisans (Palazzo d’Accursio), the city’s Twin Towers, Accursi Tower, Shopping (incredible designer shops etc), and just enough time for “Spaghetti Bolognese” (no such thing!) but fear not, the local dish is known as Tagliatelle al Ragú – delicious!

Remember to book your UK car parking in advance to secure the best deals.

Quick October Ideas:

Benalmadena – Costa del Sol – Spain: 7 nights, 19/10, 2As & 2C, B&B, 4*, Close to Beach, Bags/Transfers Incl, Jet2, Manchester departure, £2,624

Protaras – Larnaca – Cyprus (Neurodiverse Holiday): Tui, Birmingham Departure, 7 nights, neurodiverse rooms (speak to accessibility team before booking), All-Incl, close to beach, £3,690 + bags – Tui Blue Nausicaa Beach

An Nead (The Nest) – Isle of Skye: Old stone thatched cottage – unique – southern end of the Isle of Skye. Complete getaway. 12/10. 4 nights – 2As - £195-250 pn. Book directly with owner

See you next month!

All rights reserved © 2025. This is the Article for ‘Frank Brehany’s Travel Newsletter, 6 October 2025’. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), with the exception of the Substack platform for that platform’s use only, in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany)

(CAVEAT: Travel is a dynamic Industry both operationally and politically. It is a fast-moving environment and changes can and do happen in destinations, transportation, legal travel requirements, availability & pricing or with any other aspect of the travel product. I cannot account for such changes within a newsletter that is produced monthly. The information contained within this newsletter is correct at the time of its publication; all reasonable care has been made in the production of this newsletter and any comment made within has been carefully researched and is stated as fair comment. The newsletter is designed to simply speak to the news and trends that I have discovered in the world of travel at a given point in time – all information and comment within the newsletter is time-sensitive! Because the newsletter is time sensitive, you should not seek to solely rely on this newsletter content; you should carry out your own research into any of the contents of this newsletter before making any travel decision! In making any decision, including personal financial decisions, about any destination or issue I write about in this newsletter, you have to stop and think before you make that decision and carry out your own research and ensure that you have the up-to-date facts before you make any decision, financial or otherwise. Your travel decisions are your responsibility. It is therefore reasonable to say and I am sure you agree that I cannot be held responsible for your travel decisions based solely on the content of this newsletter; it’s common-sense).

Well it’s all down to the manner in which the European Union’s long-awaited security and visa changes are being reported. I don’t know what it is, but since 2016 here in the UK, the Brexit vote has turned us into an island of victims when it comes to anything to do with that national decision or the consequences of that decision the nation inflicted upon itself.

Subscribe now

Since 2016, if you believed media reports, the UK is being singled out and being treated badly because of that national decision, through the subsequent decisions the EU has to make in their dealings with the UK, because on Brexit-day, we became a third-party country. This should not have come as a surprise to anyone in the UK, because when we were in the club that is the EU, we knew what the rules would be and we were certainly part of the EU club that enforced those rules or decisions against other third party countries.

So, in the start/stop process of the new entry requirements of the EU, the first being the Entry Exit System (EES), if you are entering as a third-party country citizen into the EU, you will be subjected to fingerprinting, photographing and some questioning. It is a system that is able to digitally record your arrival in the EU and your exit – the stamping of passports will become, once again, a process that is not required (when the UK was a member of the EU passports were not stamped and we also had the benefit of free movement in the EU).

This should not be a surprise to anyone who travels from the UK into the EU because this system was planned for many years in the aftermath of September 11^th, with the UK up to the Brexit vote at least, being party to its design.

So the EU’s EES comes into force on 12 October 2025. It will be a gentle roll-out (accompanied by a EU public information campaign), and this approach will stress-test the mechanics of its operation and importantly the management of human-traffic through this new process into the EU.

But over the last 12 months, if you were to read general media or online commentaries about the arrival of the EES, you are exposed to opinions that range from a punishment on the UK to absolute chaos.

I’ve also now seen reports that shock horror, you are now also going to be asked questions about, where you are staying and seeking proof of accommodation, comprehensive travel insurance (to cover at least any shortfall in the GHIC card), enough money or access to money to sustain your stay in the EU and that you have a return ticket or sufficient funds to buy a return ticket back to the UK – if you are seduced by some of the commentaries I have seen, the heavens are about to fall on Consumers and the world of travel.

Let’s think about the moral outrage of punditry.

Subscribe now

Firstly, UK Citizens have had an experience of an important Entry/Exit System already. When holidaymakers or business travellers enter the United States they have to apply for an ESTA (there’s another moral outrage on the horizon with travel to the EU, with the arrival of the ETIAS visa!). In the US process, you have to present documentation and answer the very same questions and at entry at the US border or at any pre-clearance facility, you are fingerprinted, photographed and asked similar questions. So a good number of UK travellers (including journalists or online bloggers) already have that experience.

In terms of the questions that are likely to be asked, there is nothing new about that aspect at all. In recent years English Language newspapers were reporting on this phenomena with some local travel associations warning about the extra work hoteliers would have to carry out, almost predicting that the sky was about to fall. Even I have been warning about the possibility of such questions, either publicly or within my own family.

Then, ironically, almost as a whisper, because of the UKs new-found freedoms, the government of the day announced its own Entry Travel Authorisation (ETA), which, guess what, contain similar requirements to the EU’s questions as part of the conditions of entry into the UK.

I often say to Consumers, do not be consumed by the words of this new media world we live in, where sensationalism and playing to any available outrage is delivered through a click-bait connection. Consumers will say to me that they have seen this or that online and ask me if its true (it only happened yesterday with one frustrated person I met). My response is I hope delivered with a calm, fact-driven commentary along with the simple advice I have given to Consumers for many years – carry out your own online research, compare and contrast that research, do you trust some of those sources, are you being influenced by opinion or facts, then define how you can prepare for the challenges you may face in the travel experience to come.

When you think about it, when Thomas Cook, from the mid-1800s, began creating the forerunner to the package holidays we now experience, how did our ancestors face the challenges on their journeys? If they could face those challenges surely we can navigate the froth and fizz of an online travel commentary and demonstrate the ultimate challenge of any travel experience, that of resilience!

(All rights reserved © 2025. This is the text article for ‘The Froth & the Fizz of the EU’s Entry/Exit System’. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

Read more

It’s been a sad week for quite a few activists, not just in the UK, but across Europe and the rest of the world. A few days ago, one of the most remarkable activists I have worked alongside with, passed away after suffering from the ravages and poor recognition of Lobular Breast Cancer.

I have spent these past few days thinking about Dr Susan Michaelis, her work and achievements and I have reflected upon the many times we were together as colleagues. Susan was a major activist in the field of Cabin Air Quality, and despite the complexity of that brief, she also became a leading light in the campaign on Lobular Breast Cancer.

For many who are reading or listening to my words, they will not know nor indeed recognise that insofar as travel issues are concerned, she will be an unrecognised name amongst Consumers. But, it should be recorded that she was a dominant voice in the field of travel, because she advocated for important changes to the aviation product that would make flying safer. She spoke up not just for pilots and cabin crew, but passionately believed that Consumers were being exposed to contaminants during their flights.

This age-old, decades-old flight safety issue had been one, and certainly remains amongst some aircrew as just one of those things. For Consumers, her greater concern arose around the fact that despite suffering the same fume or smoke event onboard their flight as the aircrew, upon landing, passengers were quickly dispensed with and sent on their onward journeys without being offered any information or medical assessment.

Susan enjoyed many media opportunities to promote her concerns, but for many media outlets, the subject is considered to be just too complex and difficult to condense for their reading, listening or viewing audiences. Most certainly there were good media pieces around Europe and across the world, but on their own, they have never managed to break that tipping point.

Despite these evident difficulties, such was Susan’s qualities, she never gave up and that is probably one of my most enduring memories of this remarkable lady.

I first came into contact with Susan in 2006, joining her and a number of ex-pilots at the House of Commons, to launch an awareness and lobbying effort through the creation of an activist grouping.

I had been invited to that event, not just because it was key event in the world of travel, but because I had already spent many years engaged in legal activism for Consumers.

I remember well that first encounter. When she spoke it was with authority. She instructed the audience as to the mechanics of a decades-old problem for passengers & crew, which I had only first encountered a couple of months before through a number of airline passengers who had suffered from a fume event on their way down to Florida.

I recall that Susan spoke with clarity, with purpose and with solutions.

In that meeting, she came to represent what I had concluded, that she and her fellow aircrew were decent, honourable people, with a genuine public safety concern, not just for those who work on aircraft but for passengers also.

She was so convinced that government could be persuaded and that they would act within 6 or so months to rectify this terrible problem. I felt awful telling her that a political solution was likely to take several years. But from that first meeting, we agreed to give solidarity to each other for what was likely to be a long battle ahead for however long it took.

This is the nature of activism. For most people, they hear the word ‘campaigners’ or ‘activists’ and automatically think of the Consumer-type establishment bodies, who deal with the run-of-the-mill type issues.

But, my experiences has brought me into contact many interesting and determined individuals, across many borders, who are non-establishment individuals.

They risk everything, for the cause that they believe is essential to highlight and to resolve.

It is they who take the risk of raising important and expensive to resolve issues, lobbying to capture political and media interest, seeking to meet CEO’s, senior public officials and elected representatives, to speak and present within public and parliamentary institutions. It is they who reach across borders to bring that common experience to so many, in an effort to develop solidarity and support to bring pressure to bear; these are experiences I have held for nearly 30 years.

So it was of no surprise to me to discover that Susan was just one of those determined individuals, non-establishment, not frightened to speak truth to power, but suffering from those who would seek to condemn their work through quiet indifference. Such indifference was no obstacle to Susan. Her two qualities, never giving up and determination ensured that she remained, for some, a thorn in the establishment in her quest for Justice.

Early in her flying career, she joined the ranks of other retired pilots & cabin crew, who had been exposed to toxins. Such toxins are sometimes introduced from the engine into the aircraft cabin or cockpit environment. Many of those that I had met, including Susan, became ill, some suffering with life changing conditions, meaning that for many, they were prevented from ever flying civil aircraft again. And this was the case for Susan, who had been a pilot in Australia, but after her exposures and suffering with the adverse effects of those exposures, she was deemed unfit to fly again.

Having met many other such pilots, including Susan, I had come to realise that theirs’s was not just simply a job, it was a vocation. To be without that vocation is to mark out a fundamental change for that individual; some never recover from that personal loss. But whatever about Susan’s feelings about losing her wings, it did not define her because her vocation led her to becoming an exceptional advocate.

So, not daunted, she set about highlighting the contaminated air problem on civil aircraft in Australia and gained notoriety within the subsequent political battles within the Australian Parliament. It is fair to say that by this time, Susan was now living in the UK and together with Tristan (who later became her husband), set about on a most ambitious programme of commentary, challenge and education.

With Tristan, she reached across Europe and into pilots and cabin crew Trade Unions, creating a groundswell of knowledge and information, bringing aircrew together, in one voice, to challenge the authorities to take action.

By 2006, Susan was already embarked on a massive outreach, bringing not just aircrew and people like me together, but scientists and engineers, to create a debate and resolve on this International scandal.

Susan’s knowledge was impressive and I confess in the early years I felt out of my depth because I found myself from a Consumer perspective, in the midst of a number of scientific principles and disciplines. I learned a great deal from Susan who was always in command of her brief.

Shortly after we met, the work of European Standards started to take shape and it was in the European arena and the British Standards Institute that we started to work more closely.

Who could forget our ‘day of action’ at the heart of the European Union in Brussels, where multiple individuals joined together to make our presence felt? We all met with officials to lobby and explain why the EU needed to take action on Cabin Air Quality and of how an European Standard had been created, with 50% of the debate being absent from the room, not even invited.

I remember one Directorate-General we attended, where they were less than cordial and certainly not pre-disposed to Susan. But Susan had this knack of ignoring such playground games and drove home the rationale of her message, much to the annoyance of the so-called officials!

Such was the effectiveness of our work that day, we succeeded in overturning the European Standard and those tasked with this work, quickly created a grand committee to oversee the creation of a new European Standard.

At our very first meeting, In Brussels in early 2015, I saw first-hand the sheer anger from some of those from aviation side, expressed toward Susan. But again, she stood her ground, used facts, evidence, sheer will-power to show that she would not be silenced. How could you not be impressed?

The nature of any kind of activism doesn’t always travel well with the word harmony! Those of us who have been engaged in activism can recall the problems and difficulties that occur on our respective journeys to a Justice. We are all individuals, dealing with our own constituencies, all with the pressures of time and indeed agenda. There were times when Susan and I had our ups and downs, simply because we didn’t agree on a strategy, but whatever the disagreement, we always held a respect for each other even if we didn’t always agree and always broke bread after a hard day in the committee room.

On one such occasion, at a meeting in Paris, we endured a very long French lunch when in fact we should have been in the room discussing various aspects of Cabin Air Quality. I decided I’d had enough of waiting around so I started to speak with opposite numbers. I sought to hear their point of view and suggested that whether we agreed or not, we should be in the room, setting out our stalls, seeking perhaps some kind of consensus. When we returned, there was a great deal of dissatisfaction in the room, but I stood up and made my now famous narrative about meeting people halfway on the bridge. Out of the corner of my eye, I could see Susan standing up, hands on both hips, saying out loud, “what on earth is he on about?”. It took all my strength not to burst out laughing in this very serious moment.

It was a moment that we came to laugh about many many times since. We realised that there had been a need to break the ice, to change the direction of inaction, even if it only held a small flicker of hope of a resolution to this problem.

But the invitation onto the bridge worked in that moment and in the years that followed.

I can still see us at these meetings which saw repeat visits to Brussels and Paris but also to Prague, Bordeaux, Cork, Dublin and Amsterdam. In these meetings Susan displayed her full expertise, but she always found the time to help me understand, to explain difficult engineering concepts, the methodology of the problem. In these engagements, both with me and others, she was always kind, funny and openly human to anyone, whether they sat on the same side of the table to her, or not.

As this work developed, we had indeed created this great consensus, even though some deny that this was the case (it’s all documented boys – I now can hear Susan laughing and nodding at this comment). But regrettably, the pressures of lockdown brought our work to an impasse and it was at this point, both of us spoke about the work and the benefit that could flow from it, but we also both recognised that we had reached the end of the line – a line we were both prepared to travel to for what we had hoped would be a successful end, but it wasn’t to be. We needed to change course.

But, whilst the Industry probably celebrated this work’s demise, they had failed to see the bigger picture, that being, through our collective words and actions we had changed the landscape; Susan had been at the forefront of driving a narrative from which there was no escape from eventual change, and that change is now seen through scientific and engineering developments. The world of Cabin Air Quality has changed. Susan was one of the principal activists responsible for creating this great endeavour.

After we had left this European Standards work, we continued our engagement with each other. Sometimes to talk about a new lobbying effort via the EU. Other times, she spent time guiding and helping me in the drafting of a new piece of legislation. Whilst I can now find my way around aviation “regulation”, Susan’s encyclopaedic knowledge of such European Regulation was impressive. Other times we spoke just to catch up with the latest news and about what we were doing. Through that period, I was in the throes of researching and writing a very personal book about another scandal and Susan was completely supportive and encouraging. Other times she would contact me if she was encountering a problem with some legal issues relating to activism; I always felt privileged that she had taken me into her confidence and always hoped that I helped her to navigate to a more settled space.

Through such conversations I learned of her developing cancer, but this did not stop her from achieving her doctorate and being engaged with important legal and academic work and scientific developments and lobbying. Through this period I learnt about Susan’s and Tristan’s work to campaign and create a new political narrative for Lobular Breast Cancer. I thought that it was amazing that Susan was able to also be active in this subject matter, but more importantly, acquire the key knowledge to bring together yet more people, more victims of yet another scandal. I have been quietly impressed by the traction that they have secured in Westminster because I can tell you, trying to get things changed in that legislature is like trying to pass through the eye of the needle, as many other UK activists can also attest to!

Several weeks ago, I received a WhatsApp call from Susan. It was good to see her. As we started to talk, she started to cry; she was crying because she was upset that as her breathing and speaking was difficult and she was fearful that I would not understand her. I told her that I could hear her clearly and that she didn’t need to apologise to me, but we could find another time to talk. But Susan wanted to talk. We spoke about her cancer, her treatment and how she was determined to be at the film premiere for a film that she and Tristan made about Lobular Breast Cancer. As if that wasn’t enough, Tristan also had a film being premiered on Cabin Air Quality. She asked me about my book and the book launch; I promised her a copy. We gossiped, laughed, joked, talked about family and of course how lovely Tristan was to her and how well he was looking after her. But as she tired, it became evident that she was not able to continue the call. We said our goodbyes with my usual message to her to ‘take care’. But when I put the phone down, I felt that she had called me to say goodbye.

So this is the woman I know. Knowledgeable, highly professional, well-educated, kind, funny, determined, inclusive; a woman who was not frightened, no matter the challenge.

As we contemplate her passing, I must pay tribute to her husband Tristan. It has been evident to me over a number of years that Susan was the centre of his life. But it was a life well-shared, passionate for each other, passionate against injustices and passionate to be a force for good in this world. They were a remarkable couple: activism, complex issues, confronting the status-quo, pushing the boundaries of science, landscape gardening, film-making were just part of their joint portfolios.

Whilst the Aviation Users of the Cabin Air Quality debate has lost a valuable colleague, friend and voice, and here I would say the same to all those involved in the Lobular Breast Cancer Campaign, she has left us with all the tools, all her knowledge, all her thoughts; she is still travelling with us on the road that is activism and we must not forget that.

On a personal level, I shall miss her, miss her contact, her help, her wit, the knowing looks from the other side of the room, and her Aussie sense of humour; she will not be forgotten by me; the world has lost a very fine activist; Consumers, know her name and listen to her voice.

May she rest in peace.

(This is the script for my Podcast - A TravelVoice - In Memoriam: Dr Susan Michaelis, Activist. All rights reserved © 2025. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

I’ve been out of the UK for a few days on business and as is always the case, the news channels available when travelling abroad, appear to offer a more insightful, in-depth analysis of current issues, particularly in relation to Travel, other than what seems immediately available from our UK remotes.

I was caught by the news playing wall-to-wall via Euronews of the debate on two issues; firstly, the current debate on how the Air Passenger Rights Regulation, that is EU 261/2004, could be updated or amended. And, secondly, the now hotting up debate about what constitutes hand-luggage and whether charges can be made on passengers for those bring-onboard items.

Of course my UK listeners may think that these pesky EU issues are now longer anything to do with the UK – and they would be wrong. They are wrong because everything that happens within the EU, directly affects us, be that through a change in the law or whether you have to pay more or less for your luggage – and in any event, EU Law has been transferred onto our statute books. And whilst these debates are happening, the UK is not sat at the table, as it did in the past, and provide its valuable opinion on such changes. I am going to say, and this is controversial (and when have you known me to shy away from controversy), the Consumer “lot” is being left to the Consumer establishment who really don’t have a good and direct access to Consumer opinion (and for those same stakeholders listening in, I can certainly provide examples and attest to my own experiences with such stakeholders at a very high level) – or at least, they offer not the kind of day-to-day opinion expressed by Consumers across the many social networking areas in which they vent their true feelings!

So, let’s deal with the first area, the arguments for change to the current air passenger rights laws being suggested. The airlines have been arguing across the airwaves was that 261/2004 was unfair, disproportionate and provided extra unreasonable costs on airlines which affected their bottom-line. The EU Commission appears to have been persuaded by these commercial arguments and recommended that Member States adopted longer periods before a passenger could claim for compensation if they have been delayed. However, as with all EU law-making, the proposed direction of travel was passed to the Member States to consider. Since my trip away, the Member States have spoken, and held that they would not adopt the Commission’s arguments, and thereby the airlines arguments, but they would modestly increase the timeframe when compensation will become payable to the passenger. So, for a short-haul flight (remember, flight distances are set out in the regulation), whereas you can claim for delay compensation after 3 hours, once the newly formed regulation comes into place, that period will increase to 4 hours or more. In the case of long-haul flights, flight delay compensation becomes currently payable after 3 hours but the new proposals are to increase that timeframe for compensation to be payable after 6 hours or more. For short-haul flights, compensation payable will be increased by €50 to €300 whereas long-haul flights will suffer a small drop in compensation levels from currently €600 to €500. The arguments continue that these changes are detrimental to Consumers because the majority of flight delays occur on average for 2 to 4 hours. I would argue that this is more likely to happen with short-haul flights, whereas many long-haul delays are more than 6 hours, some involving an overnight stay!

It is as ever, a demonstration of the EU & Member States route to consensus – that’s how good or reasonable laws are made!

Then there’s the issue of the hand-luggage. This one has been running since 2014, when the European Court of Justice held that charges for bags to be stored in the hold were reasonable but when it came to charges for cabin-baggage, they considered that these could not be made because:

“…baggage that is not checked in, namely hand baggage must be considered, in principle, as a necessary item for the carriage of passengers. Consequently, the carriage of hand baggage cannot be made subject to a price supplement, provided that it meets reasonable requirements in terms of its weight and dimensions and complies with applicable security requirements.”

Highlighting as they did, that placing bags into the hold would likely cause charges to be made to the airline, whereas cabin-baggage did not attract charges against the airline.

It came to a head last year when the Spanish Ministry for Consumer Affairs fined several low cost airlines for making charges for hand-baggage. The size of the fines, running into millions of € is now subject to an appeal by the airlines because they claim, that the actions of the Ministry fails to recognise EU law and their freedom to operate their business models without interference and that fines imposed were illegal. This one is set to run and run and mark my words, at the very least, bag measurements for the aircraft cabin will likely shrink, which will in turn cause even more confusion and inconvenience for long-suffering passengers!

But whilst the great and the good, often in the absence of valuable travel commentary (which only expresses its outrage at the issues after the event), vexate and define the extent of your rights, I am now going to turn to the real lived examples of what it is like to be a low cost airline passenger!

My recent outward journey was fairly uneventful; check-in was easy and straight-forward, though, and this is an airport related issue, I did wonder about the value of the fast-track security entry when 50% of the available channels to service the high number of passengers were closed. The airport I flew from is a popular regional airport but it is a 20^th Century solution for air travel, trying to service the volume and needs of passengers in the 21^st Century. But in fairness to the airport, there is a fair amount of development work taking place, but this is focussed upon the car parking facilities at the airport.

At the appointed time, all were directed to the departure gate and that appeared to operate with the usual efficiency. Buses arrived to ferry the passengers to the airport, though I always find it amusing that the inclusive package I purchased to brings bags onboard provided me with a priority boarding. But priority boarding simply means you stand at a separate queue at the gate and get on the bus-to-the-plane first. But once you board the bus and get to the aircraft, any priority disappears from view as all passengers start to board the aircraft at the same time!

As we arrived at the aircraft, the weather outside was atrocious, offering high winds and torrential rain.

As we left the bus, it became evident that the crew onboard were not ready for our arrival. Tapes were stretched across the entry doors at the top of the stairways, with cabin-crew waiting for the green light to let us board the aircraft. So we stood, getting wet, cold and I dare say, there was an element of frustration rippling amongst the passengers.

But board we did after several minutes, finding our seats and placing, where we are allowed by the cost we paid, to place our small bag into the overhead locker and a small bag under the seat in front of us.

What struck me about the aircraft I was to fly on, a new version of a popular aircraft type, was that the seats in from of me appeared to be closer to me. The seat, as is normal on low-cost flights, was non-reclinable and offered a real comfort that from my perspective, is really only suitable for relatively short flights, which happily, mine was!

The flight was fairly uneventful and landing occurred before the rather long-stated flight time to our destination – it’s amazing really, how longer flight times stated on your ticket, routinely deliver a more positive experience, against the actual flight times between destinations – I really wished airlines wouldn’t do this – by all means account for expected ground times from boarding to taxi to the end of the runway, but beyond that, let’s keep it real?

But it was the return flight that this particular airline and a different airport excelled themselves with. The flight showed that it was ontime and remained so for the period that I was in the airport. At the gate you could see that aircraft outside were engaged in their boarding processes, but our gate crew announced that they were about to start boarding; really? I know other passengers were looking outside to see if the plane had arrived; it had not – it couldn’t because of the departing planes. After their departure, the apron remained empty, but passengers kept joining the boarding queues! It became apparent that our flight was going to be delayed, but there were no announcements. Some 10 minutes before our scheduled departure, our plane arrived on the stand. The gate crew then started to process people through the gate and the queues started to move forward. By the time I reached the front of the queue, the aircraft’s doors had been opened and it was only when I started to descend the stairs leading down to the apron, did its passengers start to de-board the aircraft. As we stood in the stairwell, the gate crew shouted down for the passengers to move forward so that they could fill the stairwell. We duly complied, but as more people occupied the stairwell, it became hotter and there was no air-conditioning coming into our space. People started to wilt as it got hotter. People started to take their coats off, some feeling the heat more than others, many started to sit on their cases or the stairs. 20 minutes, 25 minutes, 30 minutes, 40 minutes went by with no information or fresh air. As time passed, I could see out a small window that 4 aircrew were running towards our aircraft; yet more delays to come I thought. Some 50 minutes after we entered the stairwell, the ground floor doors opened, fresh air rushed up the stairs; a palpable relief was felt amongst the passengers, in amongst their frustrations, some perhaps almost swearing blood oaths never to fly with the airline again! I felt a certain solidarity with their sentiments.

Moments later we were released to the aircraft and upon boarding, the aircrew urged everyone boarding to speed up our arrival. The passengers duly complied and within 10 minutes, the doors were closed and we commenced push-back and travelled along the apron to the runway. Some 40 minutes later we arrived at our destination and quickly arrived at the stand. But then, with apologies from the pilot, we realised the buses taking us to the terminal hadn’t arrived – they arrived at the steps of our aircraft some 10 minutes later – the passengers were not impressed, particularly when they were dropped off some 150 metres from the entrance to the terminal.

I bet that within the Consumer establishment, the EU Commission and indeed in discussions with the airlines, they will not have had discussions about how passengers are actually treated nor will they have heard much of their experiences, for if they did, then I suspect the road to such conversations would have led to stiffer outcomes. The EU Commission knows this, just ask them about my engagement and the importance of the Consumer story which I delivered with regards to the Package Travel Directive! The political process doesn’t have to be all one-sided.

So there we have it. Whilst you and I live in the real world of low-cost travel, the great and the good seek to make changes that will ultimately affect your comfort, pocket and no doubt, your Consumer rights. I can talk and highlight and argue for the interests of Consumers, but I am only one voice. Your voice is important. But if you sit or indeed stand silently on airport stairwells all for the sake of travelling at a reasonably low price, you are giving those same airlines the message, a permission if you like, to Carry on Flying! But, it’s not a joke, it’s not a comedy, because the commercial and political interests and their agenda, that affect you directly, are dominant and someday soon, it may be too late for you to express your views or disappointment in the financial decisions you make, because by then, we will all be living in the new reality in air travel and there’ll be little that you can do about it!

(This is the script for my Podcast - A TravelVoice: The Battles & Experiences of Low Cost Airlines. All rights reserved © 2025. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany).

Since the beginning of the year, I have been totally preoccupied with getting my latest book out to the buying public. It is a true story about 4 remarkable people, captured by the many state and religious injustices of Ireland’s cruel Magdalen system.

Whilst considering their injustices, I have been grappling with deadlines and the world of publishing. Throughout I have not been blind to the terrible scenes, played out in the West Bank and particularly in Gaza. I have watched with growing frustration as the world’s so-called civilised nations appear to be trapped in the headlights of their own making, appearing to take a low key approach to action or actions against the Government of Israel and the promotion of International Law.

Several months ago, I reacted negatively to the current president of the United States’ who offered that the region of Gaza could be turned into some tourist paradise; he has recently doubled down on that ‘dream’ by adding that he would turn it into a ‘freedom’ zone. At the time he shared his wisdom with the world, I made it very clear that on no account would I ever support or promote such a tourism enterprise, particularly where it delivered the complete purging of an entire people from its land, whatever about the destruction of lives.

I have wrestled with the ethic of my commentary and realised that over the years, I have been critical of governments, their human rights records and the potential of risk that arises from such actions, against the people who live in those destinations and of the ordinary people who pay good money for that precious two weeks away, many oblivious to the suffering contained within the country that they have chosen to support with their hard-earned cash.

It has caused me re-examine the whole rationale of why we travel and visit the countries that we do. Travel or Tourism is the ultimate expression of peace and trade between countries, recognising the common ground that binds us together, recognising the International order and rule of law – it is the ultimate expression of friendship.

As individuals, we travel for several key, but important reasons. Firstly, because we want to refresh ourselves, experience something new, experience something that challenges our view of the world. Secondly, because we want to take the opportunity for new human encounters, be they with other holidaymakers or local people at our chosen destination, and thirdly, we choose a destination because we see something within our choice, that such a country or its peoples have the same or similar values that we hold.

As I have already indicated in previous articles and podcasts, I have visited Israel and the West Bank several times and have seen for myself, the beauty of Jewish and Palestinian lives and their fascinating cultures, but I have also witnessed the stark reality of those lives and the tender thread of survival of those less empowered in a highly contested region. I have ensured that I have sought my own education of the struggles of both Jews and Palestinians across the centuries and of how the global community have created the mechanisms for a potential peace, never it seems to be actively engaged by developed western countries.

In all of these conflicts of personal ethic and the joy of travel and discovery, I have always been sensitive to the suffering and terrors of the past, no matter be they Jewish, Palestinian or indeed Christian or those belonging within other belief systems.

I am also well and truly on record as condemning those who commit acts of terror; I do not have to keep repeating myself surely, about how such heinous crimes are repulsive, simply to justify my opinions or words?

Equally, throughout this Gaza and West Bank crisis I have been mindful about my use of language, and here, I am mindful of the non-binding but carefully written, but held by some to be controversial, words of the International definition of what constitutes antisemitism.

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance provides this widely recognised definition and along with it, a guidance on its interpretation. The definition states quite simply and clearly:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The guidance goes onto state that:

“However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic”

“Applying double standards by requiring of it [the State] a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” [is potentially regarded as antisemitic].

So as you can see from this commentary, I have in the past and indeed here today been very careful to show respect to the Jewish people by only speaking of the actions of a government and its behaviour within International Law.

So to dispense any doubt in what I have to say, to criticise any government, carefully and responsibly, in this case, is not antisemitic, nor is it wrong to make such critical comments; anyone who would seek to impugn my integrity otherwise, should take great care not to do so.

As someone who has been working with Consumers and commenting on a very broad set of travel issues, from the good to the bad, for some 27 years, you travel with what is expected of you from media companies and I sincerely hope that my own contributing perspective has delivered what they and the listening public have received from my words.

But there are many within the broadcasting and media industry who will know that I hold strong but respectful views of what constitutes ethical travel. I am not one, nor have I ever been someone who has spoken on the airwaves to condemn Consumer choices – I simply provide directional signposts on how to make such ethical choices.

Now there will be some who will criticise what they will see as a lukewarm approach toward guiding Consumers on ethical choices; that’s for them to make their points respectively, but it is my decision on how I should adopt the question of Travel ethics with the travelling public. Will they accept my words, or am I just another voice that gets in the way of their Consumer choices – would a more strident approach be welcomed by media companies?

Indeed, do the vast majority of travel commentators or so-called travel influencers even comment or guide their listening audience or is it their sole aim to create a travel-fluffery and avoid the very real controversial issues in Travel – I will leave that question for them to answer?

As I have considered the wide range of issues, I have been mindful to listen to the Government of Israel and of their comments. Unfortunately, much of what they say is defensive and accusatory – it is difficult to understand how the Government of Israel can claim the logic that they seek us to understand.

In the same way, we can see the daily comments made by the UN and its bodies. We can read about how academics and EU & ex Israeli politicians/military are clearly stating that what is happening in Gaza is a Genocide and contravenes International Law. So therefore, do we by design just sit there and say nothing?

I was recently greatly moved and disgusted by the recent documentary created by Louis Theroux called The Settlers. I don’t intend to extend a treatise as to its content, but in its own way it challenges us to watch and listen; it asks us not to look away. Then there’s the scenes on our social network feeds to also challenge us not to look away – emaciated bodies, bombed landscapes, deaths, injury, starvation, flouting of International Law, all of which, so we are told, is designed to rid the region of terror on the basis of defence. If we are really honest with ourselves, the claim of defence or self-defence has long left this scene of human devastation.

So the questions I have for myself is this: ‘As a Travel commentator, should I remain silent about these terrible events and the flouting of International law? Whilst the country of Israel has so many unique cultural sites, is the argument that tourism to this or indeed any other country, justified by the notion that to visit is to present the view to that country that you visit is receiving you as a critical friend of that country, or, have events now passed beyond that conditional position? Can travel ever be unconditional?

As I watch the daily feed of destruction and misery of one peoples, their dreams and aspirations, must I ignore such desires at the expense of a tacit support for another set of peoples?

The simple answer is that I cannot.

My view on the Israel/Palestinian horror is clear. Whilst I condemn the actions of Hamas, there is also an equally greater horror being committed by the Government of Israel – a government who know full well and understand their responsibilities in International Law and what they can and should be doing to promote and deliver a just two-state solution to this decades-old problem.

As individuals, we need to refresh and restore our own integrity, particularly on our Consumer choices. We need to step up to the plate and point a finger of accusation at a government in fact any government, particularly where they also commit egregious acts.

In the circumstances that are now evident to us, the continuance of tourism only serves to legitimise a government, and remember, there are many voices of opposition within Israel to its own government. And whilst we should support the people of Palestine, we should also support those in Israel whose own voices of opposition are not being heard by their government.

Whilst States dither on what needs to be done, whispered words of ‘antisemitism’ or ‘woke’ and so on, we must act as Consumers, and make a choice. When I talk abstractedly about Consumers, I am talking about my fellow human beings, flesh and blood, who are no different to the millions of families who are languishing in the midst of war and suffering.

Then I looked to what is available to buy online. It is evident that many well-known airlines and travel companies normally offer Israel as a destination. When you search, some of the companies search facilities allow you to search for a holiday, but then you are brought to a page where the information states that a holiday you may have chosen is ‘not available’. Some travel companies simply have a page indicating that holidays to Israel are not available at this time; perhaps some travel companies are making their own choices based around the ethics of their own companies.

However, some companies clearly offer accommodation or inclusive packages to Israel with the enticement for example of “unbelievable low prices”, “cheap holidays” or “best price”. It all reminds me of how when the then Government of Sri Lanka routed the northern part of the Tamil area of Sri Lanka, causing a terrible consequence for the Tamils, there were UK companies offering the same language to entice Consumers to travel close to a conflict zone. And in those circumstances, I too criticised the Government of Sri Lanka.

Between 2005 to 2015, I was engaged in the heart of the debate within the European Union which was seeking to develop a new Package Travel Directive. In that debate, I presented and argued for the recognition of the “risk destination” which could arise through a natural or man-made disaster and to provide for a greater Consumer right to cancel without penalty. Happily, the argument won the day and there is a portion of the Directive that reflects the issues of a “risk destination”. But to talk of a “risk destination’, which was the phrase I used time and time again, I also brought into the argument that where a risk arose that was man-made, this imported many arguments about the nature of how a government, any government deals with the civil order situation in their country to how they respond to a natural event – the argument being that if a country’s government wishes to enjoy the benefits of Tourism, then it should manage itself accordingly and certainly within the expectations of International Law & Standards.

The current government of Israel knows that the country holds a special place in the world with its religious and cultural sites. It has a beach tourism that is the envy of other destinations around the Mediterranean. The Government of Israel sees these jewels in its crown as a fiscal asset that benefits the country that they preside over – taxes are earned and are then used for a variety of projects for which the government has full control over. However, we must also recognise, faced with the Government of Israel’s reactions to what I class as a “risk destination”, that Consumers so motivated to travel to this destination, have the ultimate power for change through their wallets. This is the reality of Tourism and no government should take their dominant position on Tourism for granted.

So, I am asking every single Consumer who holds a desire to visit Israel, to reflect on my words, reflect on the issues, the horrors and send a very clear message to the Government of Israel that a line has been crossed and that they will not receive your support through tourism until such time as they comply with International Law. Hopefully the time will come when this wretched Government in Israel will be replaced and those who are deemed to have committed humanitarian crimes will be held accountable and once again, the Jewish and Palestinian peoples can enjoy the dividends that flow from Tourism.

I can promise you; in making these points, this is a very difficult but reasonable position for any Travel commentator to take.

My words and guidance may be small, but I hope in some small way, they resonate. All I am asking you the Consumer to do, is to not look away, and to remember, whether they be Jews or Palestinians, they are your brothers; for the majority of people, the same cannot be surely said for the current Government of Israel – I truly wish it were not so.

(This is the script for my Podcast - A TravelVoice: Tourism and a Genocide; a time to decide? All rights reserved © 2025. No reproduction, reuse or manipulation, in any form, either by human endeavour or by any form of software, algorithm or Artificial Intelligence system(s), in any jurisdiction, without the express written permission of Frank Brehany)

There is some turbulence in Travel. For many years, most of us in Europe have perhaps taken for granted, the ease that which we could enter the USA and enjoy what it has to offer. But on 20 January 2025, a new president was inaugurated, and with it, a great deal of controversy has followed.

Now I am not going to examine these first, nearly 100 days of his second term, but I am going to raise a concern about the problems that those entering the United States, be that on business or leisure, have experienced.

At the beginning of March, problems became evident, involving two German Nationals returning to California from Mexico (one had a tourist visa when he should have apparently had a fiancé visa). In the fiancé visa case, he was detained for a total of 16 days until he was allowed to return to Germany. In the second German case, they were travelling with a friend from Mexico carrying tattoo equipment and the border officials apparently assumed that she was intending to stay in the USA to work, despite the fact that she held an ESTA travel Authorisation, (remember, Germany is one of a host of countries across Europe who currently enjoy visa-free travel and are required to complete an ESTA Travel Authorisation before entry into the USA which allows for 90 days of travel in the USA or less). In this case, she spent a total of six weeks in detention before being allowed to return to Germany.

In a recent interview, Michelle Hackman from the Wall Street Journal, raised a number of issues and concerns with the trend of challenging tourists from allied countries with the resulting consequences. She refers to the nature of the “really aggressive questioning”, “shackling” and the president’s Executive Order that apparently ordered “extreme vetting” at US borders. The actual language of the order calls for the border officials to “vet and screen to the maximum degree possible all aliens who intend to be admitted”.

Hackman worryingly highlighted in the same interview that there were very few rights, even for US Citizens at their borders and probably less for non-Nationals. She cited actions and examples and stated:

“In our laws and in our precedent, we, even as U.S. citizens, have very few rights at the border. You and I, coming back into the country, could have our phones searched, and that's even more the case for people who are not U.S. citizens. It's totally legal for agents to search people's phones, to search people's social media accounts. They're using AI tools to find things on people. So it's a much deeper level of searching than people are aware of. And I think people are being even more scrutinized than they were just a few years ago because of these really recent advances in AI technology”.

Well, my AI scan would reveal much about my commentary and activism!

In early March, a French Scientist was detained in what was at the time held to be a random check at the US border. His phone and electronic equipment was examined and commentary at the time suggested that he had been circulating comments that: “reflect hatred toward Trump and can be described as terrorism”. This was later denied by the US authorities who cited that the scientist had sensitive material on his laptop, apparently contravening a usage/storage agreement. But, the same Scientist was one of many encouraging US Scientist’s to leave the USA and relocate to France to continue their work.

From Monmouthshire in South Wales, a young woman who was on a back-packing holiday was detained crossing over from the Canadian border and was challenged by US border officials. She had apparently entered into an agreement to help around the house at various house-stays in return for lodging. This was held by border officials to contravene her ESTA Authorisation, and she was deemed to be “working” without a valid visa and in contravention of her travel authorisation. She was detained for 19 days and taken to the airport in “leg chains, waist chains and handcuffs”, then placed onto her flight and returned to the UK.

Recently, the German, Finnish and Danish governments have issued travel advisories warning Transgender ‘holidaymakers’ that they may face difficulties at the US border if their gender recognition is not stated as male or female, and is simply entered as ‘X’. This follows on from Trumps executive order banning transgender people from joining the military or taking part in sports and these orders potentially create a mind-set difficulty within the USA, and creates additional problems for those from the Transgender Community, not just with entry to the USA, but potentially through their journey in the USA.

I think you will agree that this is not the norm that many of us who have travelled to the USA have experienced. In many senses, hearing the shock of these cases and how people are chained and detained for transgressions, that may have received ‘guidance’ at the US border previously, makes you wonder; what if I have negative comments about the US government on my social feeds; what if I have followed the guidance of a travel company and it is wrong; should I be concerned and how can I prepare for a safer entry to the USA?

These are all valid questions and concerns and at this time, there has been very little comment from within the Travel Blogosphere to guide you. So, we have to start from the base-point of where we live and work and the kind of life that we lead. Do you think you are free to go about your daily business and to express freely your opinion about any issue? This is our normality. I certainly subscribe to that descriptive and quite frequently express my views about life, countries and politicians. But, wherever I have travelled, I have always complied with any visa I have received, any travel authorisation given and have never engaged in any public commentary or opinion-making in any destination, and that includes the USA. That’s the nature of the way we live and how most of us travel and the respect we show to others.

I have had no plans to return to the USA for several years, and that is the current position. But, I am not unsympathetic to those from the UK who may be travelling to the USA this year or in the years that follow. Therefore, I think you might benefit from my list of things you should consider when making your plans or are about to go:

· Always follow US government advices about how you can apply to get into their country. Can you do so through a travel authorisation, or, do you need a visa?

· Always consider UK Travel Advisories – watch them for any changes, as they have done so recently!

· If you are a young person and intend to back-pack around the USA, check with your travel company before you leave, particularly if you intend to work – get their advices about your travel documents!

· Make sure you have Travel Insurance that provides legal cover – note any exemptions if you have not complied with the terms of your entry into the USA;

· If you are worried or concerned about critical content on your social media, call the US Embassy or Consulate in the UK about your concerns and seek their advices about that content, and the potential searches you may experience;

· It is always advisable, no matter the country you travel to, if entry requirements or other issues arise in your intended destination, and in this case you should bring with you the details of a US Immigration Lawyer – research and record their details before you travel – they will be or should be on hand should you need them;

· Similarly, pack the details of the local British Consulate to where you are staying or the British Embassy in Washington DC – if you are caught in a situation, ask to be able to contact the Embassy or Consulate;

· And finally, if you are challenged at the US border, remain calm, answer any questions, truthfully, politely and listen carefully to what is being said – I know that this may be difficult, but maintaining that calm will help you.

It is easy to get swept away by these terrible experiences and the conflict that may arise within your thinking. Simply, if you have already booked, then reassess the reasons why you are travelling to the USA and ensure that all your documentation is in order and that your visiting intentions are clear!

If you are about to book, you will likely be re-thinking those plans, and that is understandable. You may choose to go ahead, in which case, reassess the reasons why you are intending to visit the USA, once you have your documentation, check it, and check it again, and be clear as to the reasons for your visit!

There are wider issues of concern which relates to the ethics of travel which I have previously commented upon, but in this moment, and with what seems to be the rise of a harsher regime on entry into the United States, a new norm if you like, I hope my thoughts and guidance are sufficient in the absence of a wider conversation, on how to keep your travel to the USA safe!

©2025 – All Rights Reserved – Frank Brehany. Please note that media (this includes travel bloggers or feature writers) must not use this commentary, in any form, or to have used it in whole or in part, without express written permission from the author. This limitation also extends to any Artificial Intelligence system in whatever jurisdiction.

I am appalled! I could think of stronger words to start this Podcast but I think I shall leave those for perhaps another time when it comes to the latest misery for Gaza; the men, women and children certainly have no need of those sentiments at this time.

But there is something that needs to be said, just to aid the armchair critics of what I shall talk about, and it all surrounds the core premise of what travel is and what it means. As I speak, I want that specific audience to remember that Travel is the ultimate expression of trade, friendship and respect for international norms. That is its basis. That is how the potential for travel is formed. It is a potential that is formed through peace, justice and international norms.

I shall begin by talking about Israel. For all of my life, I have been equally appalled by the suffering of the Jewish people, learning about their own misery and the genocide committed during the second world war, tearing apart the continent that I have come to love.

As I have engaged in my own personal travels, I have visited Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. I can honestly say that the visit to Yad Vashem was probably the most profound experience I encountered as a young man. It's as vivid today as the day I can remember coming out of the memorial, into the bright sunshine, surrounded by the hills outside which are covered by millions of trees, all marked with the name of the victim of the holocaust.

I was so overcome, I had to steady myself on one of the olive trees outside, to help me gain my composure. I had just left the interior where in a silent cinema, film and pictures were displayed on the screen before us of the most desperately cruel scenes that you could imagine.

As I stood there, I felt myself beginning to choke as I heard others sobbing quietly whilst a small group of people in front of me, raised their arms into the air, noting the tattoo numbers imprinted on their forearms. When the film had finished, the men and women slowly lowered their arms without a sound. They were acting in remembrance but also in defiance.

For many years I have travelled across Europe and have lived for the part of each of the last 32 years in France. From Berlin to Bologna to Rome to Paris to Vienna, you can easily see the small gold plaques fastened into pavements or other memorials, to those who were rounded up and sent to concentration camps or commemorating those who were taken prisoner and summarily executed or placed into a forced labour.

These are all Travel experiences and are ones that I defy anyone not to be not just moved by, but to subsequently be on guard for those in their own communities who would seek to deliver a terrible consequence on a community or peoples in a justification for their power. That is the legacy of Travel experience – the clues of a human suffering are always there, wherever you visit.

On the State of Israel, I discovered how it was created and in particular the events of 1948, and the consequent Nakba or the ‘catastrophe’, when millions of Palestinians were displaced from their lands and property to make way for the creation and settling of Israel in the post-holocaust world after 1945. That event alone has provided continued International division and the failure of politics to deliver a justice for the dispossessed.

In the world of travel, who could forget the sudden and lethal attack on holidaymakers in Tunisia, beginning in March 2015 and again in the resort of Port-el-Kantaoui near Sousse. I can remember watching the live feed that literally revealed this horror, no more than an hour after the attack had begun. I started to feed my own live thoughts at the time through social media, expressing my own horror whilst trying to bring updates as I received them. It was a watershed moment and indeed a period for the world of travel.

My Travel knowledge is nonetheless not blind nor deaf to those groups who have carried out acts of terror and in particular, and still do, on the pretext of seeking a resolution to the Palestinian question. Reflection is a potentially polarising activity. Who could forget the then UK Prime Minister’s wife Cherie Blair who expressed:

“As long as young people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up you are never going to make progress”,

and this was followed by the outrage expressed by a media & political environment in 2002, because her comments were made unwittingly in the face of a terror attack that had occurred that day in Jerusalem, killing 19 people (she is also on record as condemning terror attacks). She faced the wrath of polarisation which appeared to suggest that seeking to understand why terror takes place, is akin to agreeing that terror-acts are acceptable. The then labour MP, Bob Marshall-Andrews expressed a recognition of this conundrum; he stated:

“You can hate the sin (of terrorism), but still try to understand it”.

So, like others, who could not be other than repulsed by the actions against ordinary innocent people? I too condemn terrorist acts without a blink of an eye, but that does not stop me from asking the question of “why”?

This brings me to my own family history, where some family members were part of the resistance in Ireland against a brutal oppression, then having to live in the immediate aftermath of independence and navigating the terrible civil war; I came to understand and know their reasons of why they did what they did.

But let us not be also blind as to whether or not States ever give into a terrorism. Let’s take my own country, the UK, which has for generations promoted the mantra that we should not give into a terror. Then you begin to look at our history and you can see examples of where an acceptance of changes within a peoples has led to a different relationship, pragmatic relationships, for example, Ireland, Cyprus, Aden, India. So we must always be careful of the binary narratives, sometimes understandably, created by politics or a media.

Whilst I have had several very happy trips to Israel, travelling from one end of the country to the other, I’ve also travelled through the West Bank, meeting many people along the way.

I hold a great affinity for both peoples and certainly hold no hatred or ill-feeling for either nationality. I would never tolerate anyone in my company or indeed publicly, who would express negative or hateful views against these two communities.

In recent times, whilst I recognise the horrors of the 7 October attack, I have also watched from afar, as families in Gaza have been split asunder, watching children being carried in the arms of their siblings, bloodied and lying limp, a life extinct. Tears, confusion, disease and hunger has been the daily staple since October 2023. In the name of self-defence, we have witnessed the might of a military power raze complete communities and displace millions of people. In the current ceasefire, the images are dystopian as tens of thousands march forlornly, but with purpose back to their former homes, to who knows what. In Israel discordant voices are shunned because of the power of the State’s government which is peppered with extreme politics, contemptuous of International Law.

Think on the article written by Jonathan Freedland who observed that:

“[Yair] Golan speaks robust good sense. He castigates Netanyahu for wanting to keep Israelis in a constant state of emergency and anxiety, says Israel has nothing to fear from a long ceasefire and believes that, ultimately: “It’s not enough to fight the military wing of Hamas. Equally important is to provide an alternative to Hamas”. Only when “a young Palestinian” can see the path to a better future that does not involve violence will Hamas be truly defeated”.

Isn’t that what Cherie Blair was alluding to; what happened in Northern Ireland?

On the question of whether you can support a repulsion for terror but at the same time ask the important question of “why”, I argue that to do so, it legitimises an individual’s right to support a peoples, but ask serious questions or to challenge those peoples government or representative organisations. These are challenges to a power-base, a government or controlling authority – it is not a condemnation of any peoples but of the right to challenge or criticise actions that fly in the face of international norms.

The problem when you take this balanced opinion approach, is that it will provoke a binary response, that you are either a supporter of terrorism or an antisemitic; it’s a lazy and unintelligent response. I am neither of those labels and those who say otherwise, whilst I support a right to say so, need to be careful, as such a narrative can harm an individual’s integrity and that can have so many consequences.

So dealing with the matter in hand, concerning the State and the various governments of Israel and all actions before the 7 October 2023, the attack carried out by Hamas on the 7 October and all of its consequences, the international allegations and the actions of the International Criminal Court, these are all matters of fact, they are public matters of concern.

I am also mindful millions of Israeli citizens in Israel & around the world who are repulsed by the actions of the State’s government, and quite likely, the millions of Palestinians who are horrified by their representative bodies – they all need to hear our expressions of support and solidarity and condemnation of a politics or representative organisation that deliver extremes or misery.

Which brings me back to my opening comments of the premise that Travel is the ultimate expression of trade, friendship and respect for international norms.

If any Consumer believes that their ability to travel and visit other countries and meet its peoples is not grounded in politics, then they are seriously mistaken, The very act of travel arises through international cooperation and agreement, usually stemming from a synergy of values or the resolution of a dispute. The very act of flight or shipping only takes place because of a political agreement. Agreements are made on travel related products, from hotels, to water to food. Laws govern entry requirements from ID cards to passports to visas. We are guided by laws and international agreements on the time you are permitted to stay in a particular country and in some cases, where you can travel to within that country. Consumer laws create a level playing field away from the potential wild west of commercial enterprises and these are found both in national and trans-national laws. The currency you buy is subject to the rules created about how much you can carry and the International markets. These are just some examples of how the act of travel is highly regulated and has its roots in the International order and politics.

But the act of travel is also about friendship and a respect for that country, its peoples and its customs – it is about bringing ourselves and those countries into the close embrace of our fellow man or woman and of our shared common values, those International values that we accept as the norm.

When you buy your holiday, whatever about your bucket-lists or Consumer desires, your money and physical presence gives support to that International system of travel and of countries who welcome our hard-earned cash. There is no escape from the enormity of your Consumer decision. You cannot look away from its underbelly.

And now we are faced, in fact the world of Travel is faced with Trump and his acolytes.

I started off by saying that I was appalled. There is a growing school of thought that a new world order is being created. From the ballot box of stupidity, those who have worked for decades to create division and perhaps destruction of an International norm, now have a power that has put wind into their sails. The question all of us have to ask is how far will we go without speaking out?

My appalled reaction arose because, as we can see, the actions of a ‘self-defence’ has delivered a wanton disproportionate destruction of a land and of a peoples. We are now witness to what at first was a casual but is now a clearly determined pathway that will potentially see the displacement of millions of Palestinians from their land, to make way for a “Riviera of the Middle-East”, threatening as he has done in recent days to “let all hell break out”.

So if he gets his way, this land will become subject to an ethnic cleansing and will be filled with beach-front properties and resorts, all sitting on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean; the past will have never happened. Holidaymakers will be able to sun themselves and convince each other that they are experiencing the culture of the land when the only culture that will exist will be a new form of tourism colonialism.

There will be many who will say, what has this got to do with a Travel commentator, surely your job is to highlight the best deals and give us a bit of travel-fluffery? Say what you want, because I have done and still do deliver on those basic desires. But, I have never been a one-trick travel pony. I have advocated for safety (and still do), I’ve challenged criminality in resorts; I’ve successfully raised the notion and argument of “risk destinations” which has been built into EU Consumer Law. Some will say that Travel commentators should not involve themselves in politics, but to say so fails because as I have already demonstrated, Travel is found within politics. Everything that is happening now, is a case of morality; a personal and a collective morality. What is disappointing is that whilst I have briefly expressed my opinion in the social networks, I’ve not detected any other travel voice expressing a similar repulsion or views to the very audiences that they seek to spread their travel message to. Is this a new crisis in Travel or are those voices sitting silently, unsure of what to say or do?

So, irrespective of whether my travel-voice reaches a wider audience or not, after 27 years of travel commentary, it’s a small gesture perhaps, but my views are quite clear:

If the Palestinian people are permanently displaced and the International community fails them, leading to the creation of a new “Riviera” in the Middle-East, then whilst I shall speak to those issues separately, I want to say here and now, publicly, I will absolutely reject this Trump travel-resort-plan for Palestine and Gaza and I will never recommend in all my Travel commentary to come, that any holidaymaker should ever visit this new “Riviera”, to do so would be morally repugnant, as it would legitimise what would be an absolute flouting of International Law and Human Rights.

Travel deserves better than this. The Palestinian people deserve better than this. The Israeli people also deserve better than this. The world owes these peoples the opportunity to live in peace and security, but not at any price.

It’s time for our Travel voices and our experiences to ring loud and clear; there’s a line, and it should not be crossed, no matter who sits in that famous chair in the oval office.

(This is the script to accompany my podcast which can be found on Spotify)

Hello there and welcome to my latest Podcast.

In this Podcast I am going to talk about the state of the world around us and how the question of conscience in our Consumer Travel choices should be at the forefront of our minds, before we book that trip away.

In recent months I have been asked by some Consumers whether they should travel to this or that destination because of extreme weather, or, because they have concerns arising from civil or serious conflict worries.

As I guided these holidaymakers to make the best choices for themselves, I thought about how I have guided holidaymakers over many years on how to make not just the best choice of destination for themselves, but where they asked, thoughts on how to navigate ethical concerns in Travel.

Over the years I have spoken about many subject matters, from blood diamonds, to breaches of human rights and conflict, through to recent years where I have been speaking openly and consistently about the issues of Climate Change and respect for destinations and their sustainability concerns.

In all of this, I have carefully navigated the tightrope of Travel Consumer commentary, where the expectation is that you will consistently deliver upbeat messages on destinations, cheap flights, best deals and so on. I’ve realised for many years that to offer up this form of travel-fluffery (even though it has its place in the lexicon of online articles), it simply adds to the lack of recognition of the global problems at hand, whilst at the same time, presenting a soulless commentary that is at best, a less than full picture of the reality on the ground. Through the heavy years of my work at HolidayTravelWatch, I spoke passionately about the plight of many thousands of holidaymakers affected by illness and injury and with that commentary, I attracted the vitriol of some, ignoring the fact that I also spoke about the positive aspects of travel.

In all of my travel commentaries, both personal, on the radio, TV or in newspapers, I have done so with respect and never named and shamed travel companies nor indeed ever recommended to holidaymakers that they should never visit a destination or country.

To travel is a privilege.

To experience a peoples and their lives can be humbling and invigorating.

To taste a destination challenges your senses.

That’s what travel means to me. Above all, it has left me with many joyful encounters along with learning about the world around me. Travel has fashioned my thoughts and opinions on not just the good things in life, but also of its injustices. Travel should never just leave you feeling warm, fuzzy and refreshed, but it should leave you with after-thoughts of life itself.

In all of the destinations I have travelled to, I too have experienced the mass-tourist models, through to fantastic meals and drinks to lying on the beach, all bringing comfort and rest to my weary bones. They were joyful times. But for me, there’s always been a flip side to the travel coin.

I have been very fortunate in that my travelling life began when I was very small, visiting a country I still love and consider home, where my family live, where the truth of my own family lies hidden and in subsequent years, discovering many more people like them.

I have spoken to people from Poland and learned about their epic journeys across the Middle-East and into Europe to escape persecution.

I have witnessed the wall of names and photographs in Bologna, commemorating their lives of resistance against a fascist regime.

I have seen the many street memorials in Berlin, commemorating those who resisted and perished in a brutal Nazi system.

I’ve stood and read the memorial at the Gare Austerlitz in Paris, to all those French Jews who were transported from their homes to concentration camps in eastern Europe.

The Yad Vashem memorial in Jerusalem had such a profound effect on me as a young man that I had to hold on to an olive tree, which was commemorated to a Jewish victim, lest I should fall in my tears.

I’ve witnessed the lives and indeed joy from young and old on the West-Bank despite their obvious daily personal pressures; they were kind, generous and welcoming people.

I remember the wonderful French man who told his story of how he and other young French men were forcibly removed from Normandy to work in Nazi factories, many suffering with hunger and injury. He had lost several fingers. At the end of the war he could not bear to return to his home in Normandy, such was the pain he endured.

In Abu-Dhabi, I had the most amazing encounter with two Palestinian Doctors, an Iraqi engineer and a Syrian Teacher. All displaced, but had made their lives successful by travelling around the world, looking for peace. They were all living now as close as they could to their respective homelands.

In one of the most beautiful countries I have ever visited, I’ve witnessed the crumbling infrastructure and in the back streets of Havana, an evident poverty, but whatever the challenges of daily life, and the modern history of the country, I saw the resignation, a spirit, a respect for me in their faces. It was humbling.

In America, I was shocked to meet people I knew, who espoused a normalised apartheid toward black people in their town; they were to be corralled, to be separated, rights were diminished.

American people I met also questioned the strength of my own religious beliefs and indeed Europe’s beliefs, expressing a religious practice that was concerning and one that I did not recognise.

In recent years I have told the stories of those who simply cannot afford to travel, or, about those who service holiday accommodations and how they cannot afford a place to live, some sleeping on beaches in tents or within caravans.

I have spoken with people in Spain, worried about the rise of criminal gangs; to people in France concerned that Climate Change is wiping out their business and way of life.

These are the elements that live on the flip-side of the coin that is travel.

Which brings me to the present day and indeed of the concerns of the holidaymakers I have been speaking to.

Since the beginning of this century, we cannot be blind to all of the problems of the world around us. The problems are defined by a global society that is reluctant to make changes that are necessary if we are to gift a world fit to live in for our families and future generations; there is a systemic campaign to deny its existence, supported by some governmental and corporate denials of Climate Change, when all the science says otherwise. Should we be concerned when a country withdraws from International Agreements on Climate?

Terror has often gripped our societies, making us more fearful, suspicious and perhaps resentful – there can never be any justification for attacking innocent lives, whatever the underlying causes.

Other problems are created or festered by politicians or governments that simply do not recognise nor wish to subscribe to the decades-range of International Laws and Conventions, designed to keep a world away from conflict. Some governments actively engage in failing to accept their responsibility for creating the conditions for regional conflicts with untold consequences. Some reject asylum seekers or refugees; some have separated families. Women’s reproductive rights are now under threat; the predicament of women is becoming ever more perilous across some countries in the world – they are to be subservient. Books are being banned and removed from libraries, with the consequence of a misapplied anger against ‘woke’ being used as an excuse to reverse the ideals of a progressive society. Threats to LGBTQ+ rights are growing; debates are becoming binary against a diversity that is a society. Overtures are made to take over another’s territory, whilst many thousands have been killed, injured or millions are displaced, all with a government’s complete disregard for their obligations found within International Human Rights. World health remains in peril particularly where a government withdraws from the WHO.

There are so many examples, so many areas of concern, which flies in the face of what many grew up with; stability, growing progressive societies, calm, increasing respect, respect for international norms & human rights, the threat of war receding, a world that was opening up before our very eyes.

When you listen or look at my brief summary of the world’s travails, you begin to see that these are so-called ‘new’ standards being imposed on a particular country’s citizens or indeed on those beyond their borders.

So I would say to any holidaymaker, if you have concerns about a destination, or even if you have no evident concerns, ask yourself, what kind of society do you like to live in – what are your standards or expectations for that society? Then, when you come to look at a country or destination to visit, what do you know about their standards – do they match your own? Even if they don’t match your own expectations or standards, ask yourself, how far adrift are their views to yours. Do their views repulse you?

There will be some who will say, ah yes, but you should be prepared to visit a country with opposing views to your own, just as you have done; fair point! But what I’m speaking about here is not the world of travel of the past, but of the present and of the future.

Who could not have been impressed by Bishop Budde’s homily, where she implored a new president to think on the asylum seekers and refugees, of children in immigrant families, of the LGBTQ+ community, highlighting how there were many in a country who were scared of what may come?

This is but one country in the here and now and into the future, whose marketing will entice you to experience the ‘dream’ and a short blast of a consumer society in the extreme. What do other countries entice you with to visit them I wonder?

Travel is the ultimate expression of friendship and trade between countries – it brings us into new spheres and possible opportunities. In considering this point, one journalist quite correctly offered, against the background of terror attacks in destinations, that we should not be expected to be the ‘Foot-soldiers in the war on terror’, in other words, by having holidaymakers on the ground, in the midst of risk or conflict, their presence offers a ‘normality’ in that particular country and therefore it was not fair to expose them to this responsibility.

In this new-age of global order, I think the time has come for us as individuals, as Consumers, to think of the ‘foot-soldier’ reference in a different way. So coming back to my personal standards question, look at those personal standards or beliefs, look at your loved ones, would expect any less for them? Is a holiday to a given destination because of its enticements simply enough – are you intending to or perhaps unknowingly normalising a particular destination which runs contrary to your belief systems? Are you happy to offer yourself as a ‘Foot-soldier for Consumerism no matter the cost?’.

It's not an easy question to ask yourself, but it is a necessary one.

It’s not a question for all, but for individuals – it is a matter of conscience.

Remember, the concept of consumerism is broadly defined as:

“[the] relentless pursuit of consumption by the market economy, advertising and mass media. It creates a culture of mass consumption and influences individuals’ purchasing power and desires for products…[which] undermines our ability to make informed, ethical choices…Harrop shows how we can challenge advertising and its threats to human and environmental well-being and prosperity”.

So, is it perhaps time, as we move from a societal adolescence and into adulthood, that we express our individual feelings and deliver Consumer decisions about one situation or another, through the exercise of the rights contained within our own standards and wallets?

If sufficient Consumers around the world became more ethically aware, conscious-driven, human rights focussed, maybe, just maybe, the loss of Consumer revenue would return saner minds to these destinations and companies.

As an individual Consumer, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain, because the world out there is bigger, broader and contains people who think just like you and me, have the same desires and dreams as us and are likely wondering if you will support them in these difficult times.

The choice as ever, is always yours!

(Podcast & article © 2025 Frank Brehany - All Rights Reserved)

(The following is the article/script for my Podcast which can be found here)

Hello and welcome to my latest Podcast, in fact my final Podcast for 2024.

At the beginning of December this year, I was going to write an article and podcast about my trip to Vienna and its Christmas Markets. Whilst I was there, I was watching a German-language news channel, when a piece revealed the preparations being made for the Christmas Market, in a town within southern Germany. The journalist highlighted the security measures being made, speaking to police and to passers-by, building positivity before the opening of the Markets. For the following few days, I visited many of the Christmas Markets in Vienna, without concern, with the only disturbance, if you could call it that, arising from a joyous outpouring from several thousand Syrian refugees, who had now made their home in Austria, marching to celebrate the fall of Assad and the end of the vile regime that had acted in his name.

Then came Magdeburg.

The horrifying spectacle of a motor vehicle ploughing through the throng of human joy, driven by a man, so full of contradictions and apparent difficulties, and so it would appear, full of an ideology that many ordinary people would consider to be beyond the pale.

And so I hesitated.

I hesitated because it just didn’t seem right to provide a reflection of my experience of Vienna’s Christmas Markets, when a chill had descended across the continent. In my mind were the sorrows of that town and of the absolute grief for those who died or were injured. Oh sure, as the saying goes, life goes on and the insatiable appetite of the Travel Industry, sorry, the insatiable appetite of the Consumer must always be satisfied, or does it?

I’ve always been fascinated by travel or travelling, not because of jetting or driving off, having a nice meal, sitting in a convivial bar or visiting a particular site, but of learning about the people that actually live there; to understand the world around us, to discover what it is to be human.

On my way out to Vienna I spoke to an English woman who was returning home after visiting her English-relatives. She had lived in Vienna for over 40 years and spoke animatedly about the City, her house, how she had to do some shopping, talking about the weather and how there hadn’t been a white Christmas in Vienna for many years. Her family had moved to England just after the war and made a life for themselves there, but she had a yearning to return to her family origins and clearly lived a fulfilled life, judging by her life’s achievements and the many family and friends she loved or relied upon. She may have been born English but at her core, she was Austrian and quite glad to be home for Christmas.

Whilst in Vienna, I experienced different forms of transport, and in particular, Uber taxis. On many of these taxi journeys, as in many other Cities around Europe, your driver will often be from another part or Europe or indeed from further afield. Wherever you go, some are able to speak the local language, others not. But through perseverance, you can usually find a language or words, to make the journey more interesting. On one evening, we were driven to our destination in Vienna by a young man, who drove an immaculate car. I was sat in the front on the car with him and asked him where he had originated from. He told me how he and his family had originally come from Macedonia in the former Yugoslavia. However, during the war and atrocities that befell the former republics of this country, his family decided to escape and seek solace in an European country, believing that they would never be able to return. As their family grew in Austria and the situation in the former Yugoslavia repaired itself, some of his family returned to Macedonia and in turn they would visit them in their former homeland. What struck me about our driver was how he spoke with passion about how conflict ultimately never benefits a country, region or its peoples. He spoke of how when he returns to Macedonia, the country has Serbs, Bosnians, Slovaks either living in Macedonia or simply visiting. “Life is normal” he told me. “No one cares where you come from, all people want to do is live and enjoy life”. I asked him if he would ever return to Macedonia, his answer was simple; he was born in Austria, he was Austrian and European; “My life is here” he told me.

In my time in Vienna, I had the privilege of visiting The Golden Hall to attend a concert of Brahms, Mozart and Vivaldi. It truly is a wonder, awash with gold panelling and great acoustics and atmosphere. As I listened to the orchestra, I couldn’t help but wonder what this place had been like from the late 1930’s and into the second world war. As I sat there, I could see brown shirts, black uniforms and elegant women resting on their arms. The annual New Year’s Day Concert in this famous hall began in 1939, when the National Socialist Party created this concert as a way to raise money for the needy through the winter months, whilst using the venue to boost morale, particularly when the war’s tide started to turn against them. Some of the orchestra members were fully-fledged Nazi-members, connected closely to the high command of the regime. One member had been responsible for the deportation of Jews to the concentration camps. It is a history that remains problematic to this very day. As I reflected on this conflict of beauty vs a past vile regime, I was also minded that in this melting pot of country at the heart of Europe, 29% of its population voted for the extreme right political party. Could it all happen again I wondered?

As you can see from these reflections, Travel is not just about the brochure. Travel is about meeting the world around you at the crossroads of your destination, to discover people just like you and me, mixed with their own customs and traditions, but proud to call where they rest, home. Such engagements enrich the Travel experience beyond that must have another selfie or yet another glühwein!

I’ve experienced a year of such crossroads in many of the places I have visited or indeed through the media commentary I provide. I have thought about the many destinations that Brits seek to travel to.

I was doing a radio interview the other day when I was asked about the anti-Tourism protests taking place across Spain and likely to reoccur in 2025. I detected that there was a growing concern that holidaymakers were being affected, sure, if you read the UK red-top newspapers, there’s plenty of moral outrage to go around, feeding into the anti-protest agenda. But the truth is this: very few holidaymakers have been affected, most probably didn’t know they were taking place. But in the interview, I provided another aspect; the aspect of why. At the crossroads of a country’s tourism product lies the fact that hotel staff are living in tents on beaches, in caravans, in half-built buildings. Towns and regions have been changed by tourism, where local services are virtually non-existent for local people, where rents are too high; it puts perspective on what you are buying into and what is actually happening at the destination of your choice. You should be curious; that is what Travel is about.

As I’ve already reflected on the Uber driver I met in Vienna, I thought also about 4 men I met in Abu Dhabi one hot evening, who invited me to sit with them to talk about our lives. The four men were refugees. Two were Palestinian and had travelled the world to find a home, both qualifying as medical doctors. One was an Iraqi engineer, escaping from his country’s turmoil, the other a Syrian teacher, hoping one day to be able to return to Syria. I wonder now how they must feel or indeed where they are now. These four men only had one objective, to live a life in their home. I would so love to meet them again.

I’ve been to the USA many times and in fact work through a US-based Standards Committee on Cabin Air Quality. I’ve recently thought a lot about many of the people I have met there on my journeys, from the UK-Midlands man who had made a home in California, to the inn-keeper family I met in the Rockies, through to a very proud Indian woman determined to find Justice for her family and her people. I think to those I know at this moment, troubled to find that they are worried what 2025 and beyond will mean for their country, a country that has literally torn itself apart politically, seeking a purity through a fundamental society that bans books. That is the crossroads you will find beyond the theme parks and the tourist diners.

As I speak to you about my experiences from Vienna to other destinations, I simply ask you to remember that Travel truly instructs us about the world around us, how its changing, its fears, irrational or otherwise, that arise from such changes, but more importantly, the discovery of a common humanity; our common humanity.

If I could ask you just one thing on this New Year’s Eve, it would be this. If you can afford to getaway or travel, then make the crossroads of our destinations become the dominating travel trend of 2025. Meet and speak with people in your destinations and share those personal experiences with the world around you. Perhaps we can make our Travel world around us seem more available to those who can’t travel, more human, more positive, more compassionate.

As for the insatiable Consumer appetite, I want to assure you that I will write about Vienna’s Christmas Markets for 2025, because after all, we still have our dreams to fulfil.

Wishing you all a very happy and peaceful 2025, no matter where you live.

(All Rights Reserved © 2024 - Frank Brehany)

I realised through this summer, that whilst the travel industry would have you believe that ‘happy days are here again’, the consumer world of travel has presented itself as a mixed bag perhaps summed up by the initial observation of those who can, travel, and those that can’t, are simply trying to make ends meet.

Through the summer, we have once again been witness to the ever present threat from climate-change, but looking at the mainstream media, they simply didn’t report on the extremes of the weather across the Mediterranean and its affect upon a particular country or destination nor indeed the average holidaymaker.

It was also a continual surprise to me that despite the work of so many, over many years, 2024 Consumers appeared ignorant of the vast collection of consumer rights, which could have helped them in the problems they faced this year, such as flight delays or cancellations, airport security issues, illness in hotels or lost luggage.

War has also brought a new concern into the consumer vocabulary; proximity concerns. Those concerns have clashed with the consumer conscience against the narrative of an industry seeking to persuade that travel helps countries in need of that precious £ or €; how are they expected to cope with that pressure to spend against their personal fears?

In fact when I looked back on all my written or spoken words, not only have I covered off the aforementioned issues, but gave insights into ships safety, risk destinations, cabin air quality and truthful insights into popular destinations. Into that mix I found commentaries about the people I have met along the way, from taxi-drivers, to the lives of hotel workers, to professional people living away from their homes because they are refugees, to lives lived in relative poverty and an overwhelming security apparatus, to those lives ripped apart by crime.

Since 1997, I’ve been privileged to travel and speak to so many people and seeing sights that were only in my dreams in the many years before. Privileged also to be able to speak to concerns and the lighter side on travel on national and international radio and TV, whilst sharing those experiences and the experiences of ordinary consumers.

So one of my summer resolutions was to bring together all of my commentary into one spot, within my new section, A TravelVoice. I shall continue to highlight the ordinary against the extraordinarily serious; serious enough for all who love to travel and for those ordinary people who have found themselves in extraordinary situations. But on top of this rich tapestry, I also gave some thought to inbound travel to the UK and Europe. For many it is a right of passage and none more so than for our American cousins. So some of my first travel articles will be focussed on those ‘cousins’ and what they should expect to find when they get here; it’ll be very interesting to look at travel from a different perspective.

But thinking of perspective brings me back to my opening comments that of those who can, travel, and those that can’t, who are simply trying to make ends meet. What do you say to the latter? Do I have anything to say about the fact that some 20% of our citizens have not been able to travel to any destination in 2024? Can any of my words actually change anything; is anybody listening to their plight or is it the case that we are moving into a period where only the monied can travel?

Yes, it’s not all about the gloss; it’s about the very roots of our consumerism tendencies, both the good and the bad.

I hope that as more of my travel articles appear, you will enjoy this armchair journey into the heart of our dreams.