So the argument is � let�s make the system more expensive than it can be and fund that additional cost by making ETA/visas more expensive than they can be without benefiting out public finances (since the goal is purely to fund an unnecessary expense?). And of course increasing the cost of ETA/visa has an impact on the country�s attractiveness to foreign visitors so if we sacrifice tourism income on the way it doesn�t matter?

oh, and the argument is also that uk citizens don�t get automated border control into the us and some Schengen ports because the fcdo doesn�t care about the situation of uk citizens visiting abroad, but imposing unnecessary queues and inconvenience to EU or US visitors will miraculously lead EU member states and the us government to find ways to give Uk citizens automated border clearance e in the us and whole of Schengen ports because they will be so empathic with the situation of their citizens visiting the uk?

Dont take me wrong, I too am frustrated several Schengen entries are still unable to deliver effective automated border processes and that the US refuses to do so except through limited and extortionate global entry,. However, the whole notion that it can be a good idea to make a system deliberately more inefficient and more costly than it is and can be just for the sake of making it needlessly punishing to anyone simply doesn�t resonate with me.

I understand, but my point is that even though it seems like a limited number of desks to you because what you rightly observe is that they are not enough to absorb queues, that � limited number � is already vastly more than is needed in airports that use automated border processes for eligible foreign visitors. In other words � not enough � is by no means synonymous with � no additional � at all.

Again, it�s easy to estimate the gains by looking at countries which have installed automated border processes for far more visitors than in the uk, such as Singapore, Australia or Israel, the effects on workforce are massive, particularly when combined with pre screening through electronic authority as is the case in the uk now as it further limits the necessary checks for passports that have already been pre approved for entry.

LIS is a hell hole for anyone who can't use the e-gates though.

The expense isn't unnecessary - conducting immigration checks to prevent unlawful immigration, stop people from working without the right visa (thereby protecting UK jobs), and providing a deterrent is perfectly justifiable. Illegal immigration isn't so easy to detect with an eGate, and the Gate can't provide the deterrent of "you'll have to explain yourself to an officer".


The issue isn't about "efficiency". It's about what's best for UK citizens, and placing a greater emphasis on reciprocity is a part of that.

Probably best to leave it here, otherwise we'll get sent to OMNI...

Of course there is a clear gain to the workforce at the border, that�s clear. But the argument also runs both ways, and my point is about the fairness and reciprocity which I assume the EU could easily bring about if they wanted to with some relatively simple adjustments to the operation of their e-gates. And think of the benefit to EU border force staff at the current points of entry where e-gates are not permitted with a UK passport.

The fact that last year I could have gone thru an e-gate using my Australian passport but kit with my UK passport is really rather pathetic.

Where in the EU are e-gates permitted for Australians but not UK citizens? I don't think I've spotted that myself, though from memory HEL lets Japanese and maybe some others use them.

Anyway re the 'easy' point, clearly one of the main barriers to allowing Brits e-gate access is the need still to stamp the passport, which at least partly defeats their efficiency. That said e-gates are increasingly available at more EU airports (LIS as above being one, and many in Italy for example). But the real gain will be when stamping is eliminated. That has been in the works under the EES project for a long time but as also noted upthread, repeatedly delayed. I don't think anything is easy when it comes to Schengen border controls tbh, frustrating as that is for UK citizens.

Last October, in MUC.

Forgive the na�ve question but I thought when the boarder guard scans the passport before stamping that it should flag whether or not you've hit the 90 days? Or am I wrong? Only time I've been questioned on entry was in Berlin when I was asked how long I was planning on staying, as three weeks prior I'd left Malaga where the boarder guard didn't scan my passport and just stamped it there and then when I handed it over. I told the Berlin guard that and he just rolled his eyes and then stamped my passport.

I did visit ARN on a tier point run last year but it was via HEL. I wasn't asked anything on the transit through HEL (used e-gate and then the passport was stamped) but I do remember the boarder guard questioning me when going back through passport control at HEL. Think he was bemused at me transiting back after one day but I said I'd been in Stockholm and was summarily stamped out and it wasn't unfriendly or aggressive.

In any case the OP's partner was treated disgracefully and by the looks of it, illegally, by the ARN boarder force. If he had proof of onward travel I really don't see why they had any reason to refuse entry.

Justice and fairness overrides all this. Your attitude of lets ignore injustices and plain unfairness of the situation is perhaps why the world is such a mess, everyone ignores the little injustices and they keep on accumulating and building into larger ones. How is reciprocity a bad thing? I have EU passport as well, so it really affects me not - it is all about not ignoring the "wrongs" in the world. I think such attitude as your exactly describes why nothing has and likely will never be done to improve the situation, few are willing to complain and folks just "bend over".

This happened to me in HEL in August with an almost brand new passport with plenty of empty pages. That was after she interrogated me for several minutes about my itinerary in the Schengen zone during a tight 38 minute connection en-route from the US to BER. Two months later, arriving in MAD from the US, nary a question was asked.

As a UK passport holder I�ve certainly noticed more questioning when entering, and leaving, the Schengen zone over the last few years. In Germany and the Benelux countries I�m routinely asked the reason for my journey, duration and have to wait while �things� are checked. I find it quite starkly different to previously.

Spain, France and Italy are far more relaxed and am rarely asked questions.

I don�t know how Swedish immigration works, but in the UK there is no expectation of entry. It is down to the officers on duty to make a decision based on the information provided to them. Discussions of illegality are unlikely to be helpful.

I assume then that the UK should stop requiring a visa from citizens of Morocco, South Africa, Thailand, Colombia, Turkey, Tunisia and the host of other countries that don't require a visa for British citizens to visit them but that the UK imposes a visa requirement on? After all, this is certainly not a reciprocal attitude on the basis of the UK government...

I find that just not credible. If he was taken away for questioning as stated then there would almost certainly be some record made, which would show up on passport scanning when entering. If that happened in the U.K. then a record would be made and it would lead to the person being stopped every single time they came into the U.K.(Assuming a non U.K. passport).

So I would countenance your friend to expect problems every time they travel to Sweden in future.

OP, I am sorry your partner had that experience.

As a Swedish citizen even I’ve had unpleasant interactions at ARN after presenting my ID card instead of my passport. Usually I get a loud sigh and often a lecture that I’m not allowed to exit Schengen using the card (partly true)…