British Passports to cost more!

[John]

An announcement has been made today that British Passports will cost more as from 04.10.07. Click here for more detail.

[Marco 72]

Apparently the increase is been introduced "to cover the growing cost of providing consular assistance to British passport holders overseas." Just curious: does anyone have any experience of receiving some kind of assistance from a British mission abroad?

[Dawie]

It also begs the question: why not charge the consular fee at the moment WHEN someone actually requires consular assistance, instead of building it into everyone's passport fee. The majority of Britons go on holiday without ever requiring consular assistance. Surely it would make more sense to charge only those who actually require the assistance?

But then again sense is something that is sorely lacking at the Home Office.

[John]

Actually yes, I got married in Thailand and in accordance with Thai law I needed to sign an affirmation document at the British Embassy. That task was done in the Consular Section of the Embassy.

Whilst there, lots of people who unfortunately had lost their passport and needed some sort of replacement document to get them back to the UK.

I suppose it is a bit like an insurance policy. You hope you never need to contact the Consular Section regarding lost passport etc, but I suspect you are rather grateful if indeed you do need to contact them.

[PASS]

Whilst there, lots of people who unfortunately had lost their passport and needed some sort of replacement document to get them back to the UK.

Yes, they provide a travel document vaild for a single journey in a most direct route (just return back to the UK, no other travel allowed!). Upon return, the person need to apply for a fresh passport.

[OL7MAX]

It also begs the question: why not charge the consular fee at the moment WHEN someone actually requires consular assistance, instead of building it into everyone's passport fee.

My question would be different. Why charge for it at all? It's becoming a creeping habit with all UK governments to charge you extra for things they have previously been covering under general taxation ... and still charge you for it under general taxation as well.

Like bin collections. They'll move it to every alternate week without any commensurate reduction in council tax. In a few years they'll tell people they can do it weekly ... but it will cost more money. The big question then would be not "OK, but what day will the collection be?"

(Not to belittle your question, Dawie)

Yes, they provide a travel document vaild for a single journey in a most direct route (just return back to the UK, no other travel allowed!). Upon return, the person need to apply for a fresh passport.

Why? Shouldn't he then get that new passport free? It's covered under the insurance that everybody has paid, isn't it? I know that what I'm saying isn't intuitive. If I were in that situation I'd come back, pay the fees and get a new passport. But, think about it for a bit ....

Should they go PPP - it would cost them less than a pence per passport for the insurance equivalent of a "protected no claims".

[JAJ]

My question would be different. Why charge for it at all? It's becoming a creeping habit with all UK governments to charge you extra for things they have previously been covering under general taxation ... and still charge you for it under general taxation as well.

Originally, passports were only held by a minority of the population and the argument was that those who did not travel should not have to bear the costs of the service.

Now, as the UK becomes one of the few countries in the world to reach "passport saturation" the argument for funding passports out of general taxation is quite strong (at least on a philosophical level).

But with government paranoid about changing the rates of income tax/VAT, or for that matter de-prioritizing another area of expense, this isn't going to happen anytime soon.

[Christophe]

No doubt one of the reasons for not charging for emergency consular assistance at the time it is given is no doubt because it is construed as an "emergency". So, for example, someone who has lost his or her passport (and quite possibly money and credit cards too) while abroad might well be very grateful not to have to pay at the point of service.

[OL7MAX]

Originally, passports were only held by a minority of the population and the argument was that those who did not travel should not have to bear the costs of the service

It's a valid point that as foreign travel became more accessible the demands on consul services increased. As did other government earnings from travel - like airport tax, VAT on related goods and services (aviation fuel, for example) etc. Not to mention the indirect benefits to the coffers from increased foreign trade and tourism. No, the extra tax is pure opportunism.

[avjones]

I think the cost of a passport should be born by the people who use them - I actually know quite a few people who don't and never have had a passport, and they tend to be the poorest people. Why should general taxation pay for people who can afford to travel abroad?

Give a passport is valid for 10 years for an adult, the cost per year is negligable.

[OL7MAX]

I think the cost of a passport should be born by the people who use them

Don't worry, that will be used as the pretext for at least one cost increase. It's only fair, isn't it? And when it does happen one thing is certain: those people you know who don't use passports will still be paying exactly the same tax.

[rogerroger]

at least the increase in fees is not two or three fold.

[stedman]

at least the increase in fees is not two or three fold.

It'll be interesting to see what'll happen if passport fees are increased from 70 odd quid to £250, say, with just 2 months notice. I predict a riot!

[OL7MAX]

Don't worry, riots won't happen; the government knows what your pain threshold is.

The really stinging cost increases will be reserved for those people who can squeal less than you can.