I imagine that was a cost saving measure.
D. If necessary in particular cases, Member States may, without prejudice to the passport to be drawn up in accordance with this resolution, continue to issue the old type of passport.
Here are other member states passports for example:

It seems rather important to some utter fucktards but I can't really see why.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 10:21, Reply)
When you chose that small image were you aware that they are old versions of the passport covers?
They look like this now

My question to you now is.
Were you intentionally trying to deceive or just being thick?
I mean when you googled "eu passport" how on earth did you manage to avoid every other fucking image including the one i've posted here and choose the one you posted?
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 10:48, Reply)
Nope, this was, which you've ignored as usual:
D. If necessary in particular cases, Member States may, without prejudice to the passport to be drawn up in accordance with this resolution, continue to issue the old type of passport.
Pretty cut and dried no? The UK government chose not to.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 11:03, Reply)
Yes looks like they could if they really really wanted to "continue to issue the old type of passport."
Right up until they were required to switch to bio-metric.
This is where you go "aha! So you're against bio-metric passports?" you tedious cunt.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 11:44, Reply)
However why would anyone care about biometric passports? Anything to get through customs quicker sounds good to me.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 11:48, Reply)
You bought up biometrics, I was just wondering why, however if you want to do your usual thing of not explaining yourself, cool.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 12:43, Reply)
when the regs you posted are from 1981 and stipulate the use of the words "European Community" is rich in irony.
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 12:17, Reply)
(, Fri 22 Dec 2017, 20:58, Reply)