New EU border checks sees waiting times DOUBLE at major airports
New EU border checks have caused waiting times to double at major airports, as travellers face lengthy queues under the bloc's newly introduced entry system. The change affects passengers travelling to and from EU countries, with airports struggling to process arrivals under the revised procedures. The issue is significant because it disrupts summer travel for large numbers of Britons and other non-EU visitors heading to Europe.
The new checks form part of the EU's Entry/Exit System, which requires non-EU travellers to be registered biometrically, including fingerprints and facial scans, replacing the traditional passport stamp. Airports have reported queues far longer than usual as staff adapt to the additional processing time required for each passenger, with delays expected to continue as the system beds in across the continent.
- New EU border checks are doubling airport waiting times.
- Biometric Entry/Exit System requires fingerprints and facial scans.
- Delays affect non-EU travellers, including British holidaymakers.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of the new checks argue that robust identity and biometric verification at the border is essential for security, immigration control and enforcing visa rules, particularly under the EU's new Entry/Exit System which replaces manual passport stamping with more rigorous digital checks. They contend that short-term disruption is an acceptable trade-off for a system that closes loopholes exploited by overstayers and reduces document fraud, and that queuing times will ease as staff, e-gates and passenger familiarity improve. From this view, the priority of collective security and orderly migration management justifiably outweighs temporary inconvenience to travellers.
The case against
Critics argue that doubling waiting times to two hours imposes a real and disproportionate cost on ordinary travellers, airlines and the tourism and business sectors that depend on efficient airports, especially given how predictable this disruption was. They contend that the rollout has been poorly resourced and inadequately staffed, effectively shifting the burden of implementing new bureaucracy onto the public rather than the authorities responsible for delivering it smoothly. From this perspective, security objectives could and should have been met without such acute harm to passenger experience and economic activity, reflecting a failure of planning rather than an unavoidable trade-off.