EU’s EES delay welcomed as an opportunity to test biometric efficiency
The implementation of the European Union’s biometric Entry/Exit System (EES), designed to tighten border security and streamline the tracking of non-EU nationals, has been delayed once again, leaving uncertainty over when the system will be operational. Key stakeholders, including local government representatives and transportation operators, have expressed both relief and frustration over the delay.
The biometrics requirements of the system may also be changing. The Independent reports that the European Commission has altered the wording of its instructions to require border authorities “scan the fingerprints or take a photo of those crossing the border for the first time.” Removing the requirement for both could eliminate a barrier to readiness for implementation at many border crossings.
A meeting held on Tuesday highlighted the challenges associated with the EES delay. Gareth Williams, general secretary of the Eurostar Group, notes that no clear timeline has been provided for the new launch date. Local government representatives voiced significant concerns over infrastructure and technology readiness, particularly in areas like Dover, which would bear the brunt of traffic flows once the system goes live.
Dover Council Raises Concerns
Councillor Kevin Mills of Dover District Council, welcomes the delay, stating that “complete and utter carnage” would have occurred if the system had been introduced as planned. Mills highlights the lack of preparedness in road networks, technology, and infrastructure at Dover Harbour, stating that “none of the new technology is currently ready” and adding that communication with the Department for Transport had been lacking.
Mills underscored the situation, noting that Dover’s residents are already familiar with frequent traffic gridlock. He warned that the introduction of EES would only worsen the situation, describing it as “gridlock on steroids.” Despite efforts to prepare for the new system, residents and businesses remain skeptical, particularly with warnings from the Department of Transport about potential 14-hour delays at the border.
“It’s not just the A20; the whole town stops. Nothing moves,” Mills emphasizes. He paints a picture of ambulances stuck in traffic and buses unable to move, highlighting the serious implications for public services. Mills further expressed that these delays could cause severe damage to the local economy, and even impact national security by preventing staff from reaching the borders in a timely manner.
The council also raised concerns about the communication surrounding EES. While there is a general awareness among travelers that the new system will increase border processing times, many UK nationals and international passengers remain unclear on the specifics.
Roger Gough, leader of Kent County council, shared a similar sentiment, expressing relief over the delay but emphasizing the long-standing issues affecting the region’s transportation networks. Gough points out that problems existed long before the EES, and the delay offered a critical opportunity to address these challenges more thoroughly.
Preparations for the EES are not being written off, but will be put on hold over the winter and into next year.
EU ESS delay: A blessing and a curse
While a pilot programme is expected to begin in 2025, according to the Independent, transportation operators such as Getlink, the owner of the Channel Tunnel, expressed disappointment. John Keefe, chief corporate and public affairs office at Getlink, states, “All the equipment was in place, and our teams were prepared.”
The company had already invested €80 million (roughly US$84.6 million) into infrastructure and technology upgrades in preparation for the November launch. Keefe emphasizes the financial burden of the delay, noting that customers would eventually bear the cost.
Eurostar, too, was prepared for the original launch date. Williams confirmed that Eurostar’s kiosks had been equipped with the necessary technology, but delays in connecting with EU-wide systems have hindered progress. He urges for a phased approach to implementation, echoing the sentiments of other stakeholders who emphasized the need to use the delay constructively.
Another concern raised during the meeting was about the overlapping and fragmented systems introduced at the borders, such as the EES, the UK’s Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA), and Europe’s ETIAS (European Travel Information and Authorization System). Williams notes that these various systems ask for similar information through different channels, leading to inefficiencies and a reduction in compliance. He called for more coordination between the UK and its Schengen partners to streamline border processes and reduce the repetitive collection of traveler data.
Despite the mixed reactions, all parties agreed that the delay, while costly for some, was necessary to avoid logistical chaos.
Biometrics in play
Several key themes emerged during the meeting, particularly regarding biometric data capture and cross-border processes. Improvements in the capture of facial biometrics were highlighted as critical to enhancing the system. There was also discussion on expanding the use of smartphone technology to capture both facial and fingerprint biometrics remotely, similar to how travelers currently use facial recognition or thumbprint features to unlock phones. This concept is gaining traction as a potential resolution to reduce wait times and streamline the border crossing experience.
Further, travelers may eventually be able to pre-register their biometric data from home or while en route to the border, ensuring that data capture occurs before arriving at points of entry. This practice is already seen in some parts of the world, allowing passengers to upload facial biometrics through a smartphone app while driving to the border or airport. This method is being considered as part of a broader next phase, utilizing the current delay to improve upon the system.
While the UK is awaiting clarity from the EU on how a phased rollout will be implemented, stakeholders expressed a desire for extensive testing before any system is introduced. The possibility of capturing a limited percentage of travelers’ biometric data initially, such as 5-10 percent of passengers, was proposed as a way to incrementally test the system.
Article Topics
biometric identification | border security | Entry/Exit System (EES) | EU | European Commission | facial recognition | fingerprint biometrics
Comments