Lords just as confused about Airline security

Yesterday the bans on liquids on planes was once again debated in the House of Lords. Although no conclusive statement was made on the subject, the debate illuminated the large amount of confusion circulating in the public over the restrictions, even among legislative nobles.

The debate began with Liberal Democrat Baroness Ludford calling for the security measures on hand-luggage on planes to be reviewed. According to the Baroness, the current measures cause "considerable inconvenience" to travellers.

Lord Bassam, who served on the council of Brighton for more than a decade before joining the House of Lords, replied: "I understand the inconvenience that some passengers feel and experience when they go through security protocols at airports but we have to bear in mind that the threat of terrorism is very real."

Several other members of the House had questions about the security measures which went unaddressed. The Baron of Battersea wanted to know why toothpaste was initially prohibited by the security regulations and then permitted.

But the best question was asked by Baron Elton who wondered, as anyone putting their tiny bottles of liquids into sealable plastic bags at the airport does: "What damage can be done by 105 millilitres of liquid that cannot be done by 100 millilitres of liquid?"

Unfortunately, the public cannot look to the House of Lords for an answer to such a question. Baron Bassam could only reply: "My briefing does not extend to that', leaving the flying public still in the dark about many of the security measures in place at airports today.




Follow these links to find out more or to get a quote on Travel insurance, UK airport parking, UK airport hotels or UK airport lounges.



Jennifer Jones Editorial


30/10/2007


Related Travel News:

 
 



Read more UK travel news