On the 22 July, several insurance brokers were identified through the British Association for Insurers who will still provide insurance for travel to Tunisia. It was found that the main difference between standard insurance and the specialised insurance for amber (medium risk) countries is the repatriation cost. This also makes the insurance a lot more expensive at around 5 to 10 times higher, which makes it unaffordable for tourists. However, on the other hand, (and quite sadly), flights to Tunisia are quite cheap at the moment (GBP£70 with TunisAir). Maybe for some, this offsets the costs of travel?
---
On the 9th July 2015, the Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO) has advised against all but essential travel to Tunisia. For me, the question is: Why?
Is the FCO advice on Tunisia is going to be helpful to Brits and to Tunisia. Who pays for the evacuation of British tourists? Was this the best way to spend this money?
This is important. Too little trust in the process renders the travel advisory ineffective. Also, preventing people from travelling to Tunisia by invalidating their travel insurance seems line a heavy-handed and quite vindictive way of responding to the security needs of British citizens abroad. There might as well be a ban on any travel for any British tourist.
The other issue at hand is democracy and systems. When modern, democratic systems fail to provide decent, sane advice on security, do we not fail our core values? Do we not make the job of a terrorist easier?
I think some intelligent advice from organisations that work with international staff and have field operations would be welcome.
------
- Holidays
have been cancelled
- Security
has been increased in all parts of the country
- Tunisia
joins a list of other countries on the FCO list, including Kenya
- But,
flights in an out of the country are still running
- There
is little clarity around the warning or official definition of 'essential
travel'
- The
action underwrites payouts from insurance companies and tour operators
The Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO) has advised against
all but essential travel to Tunisia. A copy of the travel advice is printed
below and the main elements are listed above. The Guardian says that tour operators have put
on extra flights to fly back the remaining British tourists still in
Tunisia.Tour operators have also cancelled outbound flights to Tunisia until
October 2015. The foreign secretary, Phillip Hammond says that the British government
has completed an assessment of the security measures in
tourist areas and judge that "more work is needed to effectively protect
tourists from the terrorist threat." According to the Guardian,
a spokesman for a hotel in Tunisia said that the British authorities
now have better access to the intelligence gathered by Tunisian security
services.
There has been increased security in most parts of the country. However, a Tunis-based North Africa analyst Monica Marks said that tourist zones are still vulnerable. “Securing tourist sites is a herculean task and Sousse was the definition of a soft-target attack, a gunman targeting people on their sun beds.” Moreover, it is claimed that the Tunisian prime minister has understood and accepted Britain’s decision to upgrade its travel advice.
A legal firm says that there is no official
definition of 'essential travel'. It suggests that: "This
is left to the individual although the FCO gives examples of urgent family or
business commitments." Moreover, most travel insurance
companies will not provide cover for countries to which the FCO have advised
against all but essential travel. A tour operator or
airline that cancels a trip will be responsible for refunding the cost. If the
flight is cancelled because of travel advice from the FCO then the insurance
policy may pay out for accommodation that has already been incurred. If however
the trip is cancelled because there are personal concerns about the state of a
country (and there is no FCO advice against travelling), the policy will not
pay out.
A brief review
of Twitter reactions indicates that there are mixed feelings towards the FCO
advice.
Several
concerns were raised over the impact to Tunisia’s economy. Some make the link between how a weak economy can open up gaps for political fundamentalism - allowing the latter to come forward as a system that is seen to provide a solution where democracy, and a functioning economy and market system
cannot.
Some questions were asked around the purpose and the strategy behind the decision. some ask, how can Tunisia strengthen it's response to terrorists if it is now economically weaker?
There are also questions of the extent of the reach of the security policy. For example, if Tunisia is being ‘evacuated’ of British tourists will the same measures be taken in other countries where British people are being killed, such as Thailand?
There are also questions of the extent of the reach of the security policy. For example, if Tunisia is being ‘evacuated’ of British tourists will the same measures be taken in other countries where British people are being killed, such as Thailand?
Some Twitter
concerns and questions also reveals underlying racism. Some reflect on the
beauty of the country, yet the savagery of the people – making broad
assumptions on an ethnic group and using aggressive and pejorative language to describe
culture and behaviour.
One question that still needs to be answered is: who pays? In turn, this opens up the perspective around: what is the best way to use the money? It could be that it is the government who pays for the repatriation of British tourists because tour operators may not be expected to absorb the cost of what is effectively the government's sudden turnaround on security policy. And, to reiterate, is this the best use of money? Well, if the security situation needs strengthening, would it not be more sustainable for the British government to help build the capacity of security systems and possibly help train security personnel? How about sharing intelligence on Libya and Syria? And even good practices in protecting large complex systems, such as tourist spots and large towns. Britain should have something to share considering the need to protect high-profile targets, such as London.
One question that still needs to be answered is: who pays? In turn, this opens up the perspective around: what is the best way to use the money? It could be that it is the government who pays for the repatriation of British tourists because tour operators may not be expected to absorb the cost of what is effectively the government's sudden turnaround on security policy. And, to reiterate, is this the best use of money? Well, if the security situation needs strengthening, would it not be more sustainable for the British government to help build the capacity of security systems and possibly help train security personnel? How about sharing intelligence on Libya and Syria? And even good practices in protecting large complex systems, such as tourist spots and large towns. Britain should have something to share considering the need to protect high-profile targets, such as London.
----
Travel advice to Tunisia
A terrorist attack took place at Port El Kantaoui near Sousse on 26 June. Thirty eight foreign tourists were killed, including 30 British nationals. Further terrorist attacks are highly likely, including in tourist resorts, and by individuals unknown to the authorities whose actions may be inspired by terrorist groups via social media. You should be especially vigilant at this time and follow the advice of the Tunisian security authorities and your tour operator, if you have one.
There is a high threat from terrorism in Tunisia. On 4 July the Tunisian government announced it was reinstating the state of emergency, lifted in 2014, as part of its continuing response to the recent terrorist attacks. On 8 July the Tunisian Prime Minister stated publicly that further attacks are likely. The Tunisian authorities have increased their security measures but have also acknowledged the limitations in their ability to counter the current terrorist threat.
Since the attack in Sousse, we have been working
closely with the Tunisian authorities to investigate the attack and the wider
threat from terrorist groups in Tunisia. Although we have had good co-operation
from the Tunisian government, including putting in place additional security
measures, the intelligence and threat picture has developed considerably,
reinforcing our view that a further terrorist attack is highly likely. On
balance, we do not believe the mitigation measures in place provide adequate
protection for British tourists in Tunisia at the present time and we have
therefore changed our travel advice accordingly.
