Many years ago, I was working for a membership organisation, and we had agreed to bring out a speaker from the UK. He was leading a major project rethinking the nature of organisations, and especially the relationship between a business and its employees.  The reasoning was simple.  Investors purchase shares in a company, but they do not own it.  Managers work for a company, but they do not own it (except some may do so in the case of private companies).  Further, in terms of legal status, a company is treated as ‘a person’.  My speaker was going to present a talk and run seminars on the theme of ‘tomorrow’s company’, which envisioned a rather different perspective, one which involved rethinking the concept of ownership, with the idea that a company could be a property owned by all its employees.

Well, that is a topic for another blog.  There is another part to the story about my visitor, which has to do with the fact he had decided to make use of travelling from London to Melbourne to stop off on the way.  He told me that, despite having travelled a lot in the past, on this occasion he wanted to go to Eastern Malaysia, and climb Mount Kinabalu:  I should add this isn’t a mountain to climb, but rather involved walking up an increasingly steep path that takes you to the summit of a not especially high peak, but from which the view towards the rising sun at dawn is said to be spectacular.  He was lucky, the weather was good, the view was stunning, and he had enjoyed this additional segment in his trip.

Climbing over, he went back down and caught a taxi to the local airport, from which he would fly on to Kuala Lumpur, and from there to Melbourne.  Relaxed and well ahead of time, he joined the check-in line, but when he handed over his ticket and passport, he was told that he could not fly!  No-one (including me) had thought to check that he knew he needed a visa to enter Australia.  Australia requires everyone to have a visa in order to come to the country, even if the person is only on a short trip, on a working holiday, going to see relatives, or simply wanting to see the country on a vacation visit.  The rules were simple:  no one could enter Australia unless they were either an Australian passport holder, or they had an appropriate visa.  That was true back then (some thirty years ago) and it is still true today.

What happened to him is a bit to one side.  However, I feel I need to add a little more.  On finding out he had been ‘banned’ he called me, in a panic.  I had worked for the Australian department that was responsible for immigration (as well as ethnic affairs), and I knew there had to be a solution.  Although it was late in the day, I called the department and was put through to a night desk, where I explained my visitor’s predicament.  After enjoying my somewhat panickedexplanation of what had happened, the departmental officer arranged for a visa on entry to be ready when my visitor arrived.  This information was sent through to Kuala Lumpur, and my speaker was allowed to board his flight.  All worked smoothly and he arrived the next morning, ready to take part in his series of presentations and workshops.  He told me was impressed with what I had done, but when he arrived he was still amazed that Australia could control visitors so rigorously:  I suspect that in the back of his mind, he might have thought that as a former colony the British could come and go as they pleased!

Controlling borders was relatively unusual in the middle of the 20^th Century.  With a British or Australian passport, you could visit many countries without any specific requirements, documents, or entry charges.  That has remained the case for decades in many parts of the world.  Some took it further.  For Europe since 1985 the Schengen Area is a massive border-free zone encompassing 29 European countries, including 25 EU states plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein.  In this zone internal border checks were abolished, allowing free movement for over 450 million people. Most recently, following the addition of Bulgaria and Romania on January 1, 2025, it was functioning as a single jurisdiction for admission of visitors on short-stay visas.  What this meant in practice was that both citizens and visitors could travel between these twenty-nine nations without any internal border passport checks:  short-stay visas (up to 90 days with a 180-day period) are valid across the entire zone.  It is worth noting that the UK sits outside the Schengen area, a source of frustration to both visitors and residents in Europe, a topic we will return to in a moment.

Well, that is the way it was.  Today, as more and more countries seem keen to erect boundaries between themselves and others, so in Europe there are changes.  As I write, they are in the final stages of introducing an Entry/Exit System (EES).  The EES became operational on October 12, 2025, and its full implementation is expected to be completed in April 2026, although at the beginning of February 2026 it had only been wholly introduced in two countries.  What does the EES mean in practice? In essence, the EU is digitising entry and exit information and will require fingerprint/facial image capture at external borders.  From a visitor’s point of view, internal borders will continue to be open once they have entered the Schengen area.  However, passport checks are required each and every time an individual crosses an external border, one between a Schengen country and any other.

However, now it is time to return to the UK, which had refused to stay with the ‘Common Market’ in Europe.  As a result, the UK sits outside the Schengen area, and visitors will need an Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA), even though they will not need a visa for short stays (of up to six months).  ETAs are not required for those entering the UK who already have a UK immigration status (essentially non-resident citizens). From 25 February 2026 visitors without an ETA will not be able to board their transport and cannot travel to the UK, unless they are exempt on a number of specific criteria.

Eligible visitors who take connecting flights (transiting) and go through UK passport control need an ETA. Those transiting through Heathrow and Manchester airports who do not go through UK passport control do not currently need an ETA.  An ETA is a digital permission to travel.  The UK government makes it clear it is not a visa or a tax and does not permit entry into the UK – it simply authorises a person to travel to the UK.  British and Irish citizens do not need an ETA, nor do dual citizens (with both British and another citizenship).  The UK Government has made it clear that they see the introduction of ETAs as introducing a measure in line with the approach many other countries have taken to border control and security, including the US and Australia.  It also claims it will help prevent the arrival of those whom it considers present a threat to the UK.

This official story hides the chaos it has created.  Dual British citizens are exempt from needing an ETA and from 25 February 2026 are expected to present either a valid British passport or a Certificate of Entitlement (an expensive document!), when travelling to the UK.  Those with British passports where their currency has lapsed have been advisedpassports can be renewed through Gov.UK and various official agencies overseas.  The British government has made it clear that possession of a British passport is a requirement for all British citizens regardless of any other nationality they might possess.  They have explained they see these new regulations as essentially “the same approach taken by other countries, including the US, Australia and Canada”.  Their view is nicely summarised in the statement ‘No permission, no travel’. The new scheme was announced in November 2025, with the enforcement of the ETA requirement starting on 25 February 2026.

The UK has advised ETA implementation is “moving to a modernised ‘digital permission’ system where international carriers are required to confirm, through automated checks against Home Office records, that passengers have valid permission or status to travel to the UK.”  It has made it clear that all passenger carriers (e.g. airlines, ships, and rail) have been equipped with “the necessary tools to verify travel permission via automated digital checks with the Home Office,” noting “We recognise that this is a significant change for carriers and travellers, but we have been clear on requirements for dual British citizens to travel with a valid British passport or Certificate of Entitlement, in line with those for all British citizens.”

This hasn’t been academic for me and my partner, as we travel to Europe in March and April of this year.  Our flights were booked some time ago, as well as a cruise we will board in Lisbon.  We had planned a visit of four days in London at the start, or the end, of our trip, given we would enjoy seeing something of my birthplace.  On learning about these new UK regulations in January our plans have been changed and changed again (we were aware of the European rules, which were unproblematic).  First, we cancelled our stopover in London at the beginning of our trip, and then another at the end.  Next, we had to deal with transit issues, as our flights to and from London were independent of other flights (London to Lisbon, Malta to London, and it wasn’t clear how we would handle the processes required, and where our luggage might be.  At one point I had my partner going alone through immigration, getting our bags, and then taking them to the terminal for our later flights!

Within the last week or so, given the confusion and concerns that have emerged, there have been some changes on the topic of ‘alternative documents as proof of citizenship’.  The British government has made it clear, at the last minute, that it recognises “this is a significant change for carriers and travellers, and so we have provided additional temporary guidance to carriers on possible alternative documentation, including expired passports issued in 1989 or later and alongside a valid non-visa national third country passport where biographic details match.”  They have been cautious, observing that it is an ‘operational decision’ as to whether carriers will accept alternative proof, and if so, what kinds of proof they will consider to be sufficient. Fortunately, and despite a considerable amount of searching to locate it, it turned out my UK passport only expired a few years ago, and I still have a valid US passport!

Much as it is fun to write about personal issues, my reason for this commentary is rather different.  It seems that the dream of open borders is becoming more and more distant.  The UK is putting up a stronger wall, and the USA appears to begoing in the same direction.  Within Europe, there are signs that free movement between constituent countries in the EC is slowly being eroded, too.  In many ways, it now seems the possibility of a borderless world is receding, and the dream of unimpeded travel is becoming increasingly distant.

Why is this?  There have always been border challenges.  Some of the time the pendulum swings over to one side, and countries loosen borders, and work together in creating larger entities.  No sooner has this begun to gather momentum than the pendulum stops and begins to swing in the opposite direction.  Then each country starts to build up barriers, eliminating free trade, and establishing other restrictions.  The cynical observer might think this was a matter of money:  border crossings, evidence of nationality, and various kinds of impost on goods and people travelling from one place to another combine to create a new source of revenue.  However, it clearly reflects concern about identity as well:  after welcoming refugees from across the Mediterranean for several years, popular sentiment began to shift as some residents suggested newcomers were ‘not like us.’  Strange practices, unusual dress, and occasional criminal actions all conspire to put the focus on difference.

There are other ways in which this is concerns identity.  Identity has many aspects, from group membership, family, genetic and social background through to psychological issues to do with self, personal relationships and individual distinctiveness.  Identity is a tricky topic, one of fascination for philosophers, who are drawn to compare and contrast the meanings of identity as a descriptor of social location, or as an element of a personal sense of self.  It is also important as a way of thinking about development.  Does a child have an identity?  At birth?  While still young and yet to become an adult?  Most important, is identity something that is always intrinsic to the individual, their ‘real’ identity as opposed to the obvious changes that take place in physical and behavioural characteristics over time.

While writing this blog has been an exercise in thinking, it is also a counterpoint to the discussions I and my partner conduct with a group, operating through the auspices of U3A, the adult, post-compulsory and non-accredited system which supports learning activities, conducted across Australia and in many other countries.  U3A activities are targeted on the over-50s, but with the greatest number enrolment being people past 65 and up to ninety years of age.  In 2026 we had decided the theme for our meetings would be ‘identity’.  We meet twenty times a year, once a fortnight over the period from February to November:  there are two groups at present, meeting on alternate weeks but exploring the same ideas.

How can you tackle something like identity?  We began with a story explored in an earlier blog, as we debated the extraordinary life of Mehran Karrimi Nasseri, an Iranian refugee who lived in the departure lounge of Charles De Gaulle Airport’s Terminal 1 from 26 August 1988 until July 2006, when he was hospitalised.  He returned to living at the airport in September 2022, and he died there in November 2022.  Nasseri alleged that he was expelled from Iran in 1977 for protests against the Shah.  True of not, he became an embedded resident of the airport.  When he was given an opportunity to leave during those sixteen years, he refused, denied his Persian/Iranian background, and wanted to be known as Sir Alfred Merhan.  He offers a marvellous case study for exploring some of the issues that arise in considering identity.

Over the year, our course will go on to examine other case studies on identity, including the role doctors perceive for themselves as AI systems gradually take over areas of medical practice (sometimes doing a ‘better’ job than live doctors achieve).  We will also read one of the patient interviews reported by Oliver Sacks as he explored the strange ways people can think about themselves, who they ‘really are,’ and how they relate to others.

For most of us, stories like those of Mehran and the individuals examined by Sacks are dealing with experiences that are ‘foreign’ to us, both in the sense of what happened, but also in the sense of what they reveal about the peculiarities of identity.  Most of us could not imagine living in an airport terminal for fifteen years or being confused about whether our partner is a person or a hat!  That would be to miss the point, however, as examining such extremes can be revealing, suggesting our sense of identity might be somewhat fragile.  Could we end up with some ‘strange’ views about our own identity, even to the point we might work hard to cover up what we believe is true, even if it seems ‘unbelievable’?

A final note.  Identity is the theme of the U3A course, and it is likely to emerge in some future blogs.  However, as we are about to go travelling for a few weeks, contributions to the weekly blog program will be suspended for a couple of months.  Will that stop me writing about issues?  I am not sure, but at this stage I am intending to write short pieces as we travel, perhaps to be summarised in a more traditional communication when back in Australia.