| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
“replica bombs were smuggled past security staff in hand luggage during a safety inspection at Britain’s second busiest airport. Staff at Gatwick airport failed to identify artificial explosives carried by undercover transport inspectors from Brussels even though one device was allegedly identified as suspicious by X-ray scanners.”
An interesting interpretation of that incident by The Sunday Times was that although the staff who check objects through security know that a quality control device sometimes brings up images to check that they spot them, they are under so much pressure to get people through security quickly that they do not have time to concentrate on what they see on the screen.
As for the incident that I have described, for all I know BAA’s management has improved the way in which it deals with complaints, but I am not confident that it has improved the way in which it deals with security.
I also want to mention the matter of the missing suitcase. We are always told that it is imperative that there should be no piece of luggage on an aeroplane that is not identifiable, and that therefore there should never be any unaccompanied luggage. That leads me to the assumption that, in the interests of security, staff ought to know where suitcases are; but that clearly did not apply to my suitcase. It went AWOL, then reappeared, and when I asked BAA staff where they thought it was, I received no answer.
The curious aspect of the matter is that air travel is the most prescriptive mode of travel that I can think of. Air travellers must buy named tickets that cannot be transferred. They are told exactly what they can and cannot take on the plane. They are asked to turn up hours in advance. They are not allowed to take any liquids through security, which means that they must leave their can of Coke at one end and purchase a rather expensive can at the other end. People put up with all that because the deal is that it is to do with safety, so the least that we should be able to expect is that those with a duty to impose safety measures take safety seriously.
The same applies to the issue of suitcases. The problem seems to be not just security, but the fact that BAA deals with one thing while—in this instance—EasyJet deals with another, while a third company tracks the luggage. None of them seem to care much what happens. They assume that tourists need only take out travel insurance. In no other walk of life would it be regarded as acceptable to assume that people insure themselves against the breach of part of a contractual obligation, but in this case it seems to be considered routine that people will lose their luggage. I was without luggage for two weeks, but the maximum that BAA is prepared to provide is three days’ compensation at £25 per day against receipts—in other words, a maximum of £75—because it is assumed that people have insurance.
I should like the Minister to do three things. First, I should be very grateful if he could obtain what I failed to obtain: a genuine datelined account of what was done with the security crew. At what point were they taken off duty, and at what point were they retrained? Secondly, I ask the Minister to obtain the European Commission report—which I tried to obtain through the website, but which proved not to be available—and, if possible, to share it with me. Thirdly, I ask him to examine the issue of lost luggage. It seems to be dealt with in such a haphazard way that I do not feel confident that security is taken as seriously as it should be.
10.4 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Jim Fitzpatrick): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Ms Stuart) on securing this debate. I am sincerely sorry to learn that her experience of security at Gatwick airport was far from happy. It is also disappointing that she had to go to so much trouble to follow the matter up, and sometimes even had difficulty in finding the right person to deal with.
Responsibility for each security measure is allocated by law to appropriate parts of the complex aviation industry, and it clearly is a complex system. However, I can assure my hon. Friend that the Department for Transport, as the security regulator for the industry, monitors performance through its inspectors and takes appropriate action where required. I will turn to the specific questions my hon. Friend asked shortly, but I would like to begin with some more general remarks to set the scene.
We are in a period of sustained severe threat to the UK from terrorist attack. Aviation remains an aspirational terrorist target. A lot of good work is done by the aviation industry to deliver security requirements. At Gatwick, the airport deploys the very latest equipment available for the screening of cabin bags and the passengers themselves. The staff working at airports have a difficult task, and I am sure Members will join me in paying tribute to the hard work they do. Indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Laura Moffatt) raised this matter, and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston, who has had the problems, has generously accepted that staff generally do an excellent job in difficult circumstances. We all appreciate their efforts. I hope that my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot comment now on specific operational matters at particular locations, but what I will do is set out the general context of the UK’s aviation security programme with reference to Gatwick airport, and respond to her points later.
As I have said, the Department for Transport sets the standards for aviation security, but it is up to the airport’s own management to decide precisely how it will ensure that these standards are met. Locations differ, and this means that different practical approaches to security need to be taken.
The other essential aspect of aviation security that I should touch on is what we call the layered approach to security. Public attention on aviation security is often focused on the aspects of security that are most obvious
to travellers, such as X-raying of hand luggage and walking through a metal detector, and, of course, these are important aspects of the security picture. Importantly, however, these are only small parts of the security picture. Other aspects such as physical security measures, staff screening, policing, intelligence, travel document security and staff training all contribute to the layered security arrangements at Gatwick and other airports.
The Department for Transport always investigates any alleged breach of security so that any weaknesses can be addressed. However, we also have to consider the balance between the public’s right to be informed of the risks—and the mitigating measures—and the need to ensure that terrorists are not fully aware of the preventive measures in place.
This brings me back to the layered approach to security. None of the parts of the security set-up at any location can, by themselves, deliver 100 per cent. security. As my hon. Friend mentioned, the knife she accidentally took on board an aircraft in her hand luggage when she went on holiday in August was not detected. The fact is that BAA plc made a mistake, and I am not here to make excuses for it—and, to be perfectly frank, after listening to the litany of problems my hon. Friend had, I would not know where to start.
As my hon. Friend says, BAA has written to her on a number of occasions, and, as well as taking steps to retrain the security officers concerned, it has a new procedure in place to respond to complaints of the kind that she made. As I am sure my hon. Friend would expect, this is not the end of the matter. Airport security is not simply about dealing with particular incidents of the kind she mentioned; it is a continuous process of maintaining and improving high standards in a difficult working environment. While we are reliant on the airports themselves to ensure that the necessary measures are implemented on a day-to-day basis, we undertake a regular programme of compliance-monitoring visits, including announced and unannounced inspections, and we provide appropriate advice and guidance to the industry. The inspection of Gatwick airport that was carried out by the European Commission in October, to which my hon. Friend referred, is one part of the programme of work that the Department for Transport and the European Commission have in place for Gatwick and other airports.
My hon. Friend asked two specific questions about Gatwick. The first was whether I would ask BAA to provide a timeline of when precisely the crew was taken off duty, what kind of retraining they received and when they returned to work. I will certainly do that, and I will let her have a copy of the response I receive from BAA.
My hon. Friend also asked about reports of the European Commission inspections of UK airports. I assure her that my Department acts on information arising from our joint working with European inspectors. The information that emerges from any inspection is always constructive and is the subject of a great deal of activity by Department for Transport officials and UK airports, as well as by the European Commission. For the reasons that I have stated, I cannot provide further details, but, as I am sure my hon. Friend would expect, where security is concerned we act as soon as is needed.
Finally, my hon. Friend asked about luggage handling. It is annoying for passengers when luggage is lost or
delayed, and it is in the aviation industry’s own interests to make sure that that happens less often. Indeed, it happened to me this summer, so I know how frustrating it is. I must say that the airline with which I was flying found the baggage within 24 hours and couriered it back within another 24 hours, so my experience was more reassuring than her own. On the security issues surrounding delayed luggage, I can assure my hon. Friend that as well as there being 100 per cent. hold baggage screening for all bags at UK airports, there are additional, more intensive security measures above and beyond that to deal with luggage that travels separately from its owner, for whatever reason.
In conclusion, I think we all accept that heightened aviation security measures will be with us for some time. I am sure that we also all agree that they do not make the travelling experience any more pleasant, and that it is worrying when things do not go as they should—my hon. Friend experienced that. I thank her for bringing this matter to our attention, congratulate her again on securing this debate and assure her that the commitments I have made this evening, both in general and to her in particular, will be fulfilled.
Adjourned accordingly at eleven minutes past Ten o’clock.
| Index | Home Page |