Last week I flew in and out of New Delhi’s new Terminal 3 at the Indira Gandhi International Airport. It took me 20 minutes to clear immigration, baggage collection and customs going in and 15 minutes to clear immigration and security on my way out. The Indian security personnel are getting their act together. I have to say that I found the security check more simple, more thorough, more courteous and more credible than that at Munich when I got back to Europe (and Munich is one of the better airports and far more customer-friendly than Frankfurt).
Compare that with the apparent incompetence at London’s Heathrow.
The Daily Telegraph has this to say:
The Home Office has tried to ban Heathrow from informing the public about the full extent of delays at the airport, suggest leaked emails obtained by The Daily Telegraph.
Heathrow approached “breaking” point last week, with passengers left so frustrated by delays that they resorted to storming past officials without showing their documents and slow handclapping staff in immigration halls.
On Saturday BAA, the owner of Heathrow, tried to defuse tensions with a leaflet apologising to passengers for the “very long delays” and saying people entering the country “deserved a warmer welcome”.
The leaflet suggested that passengers should complain to the Home Office.
Needless to say the so-called Border Force (BF) was not amused by this publicity about their incompetence:
However, Marc Owen, the director of UK Border Agency operations at Heathrow, told BAA the leaflet was “inappropriate”. He threatened to “escalate” the matter with ministers who were likely to take a “very dim view”. He told BAA: “The leaflet is not all right with us. It is both inflammatory and likely to increase tensions in arrivals halls especially in the current atmosphere. It is inappropriate in that it is not for you to display how to complain on our behalf. Please refrain from handing out [the leaflets] or I will escalate [the matter] with ministers who are likely to take a very dim view. I know there are copies in the hall and your troops are ready with them.” He also told BAA to stop passengers taking pictures of the queues in the arrivals hall in a further attempt to stem the flow of information about the havoc.
Mr. Marc Owen comes across as a spoilt brat who threatens to complain to “Big Daddy” when his failings are revealed. While the BAA is not known for being customer-friendly, it is a shame that their small attempts to calm irate customers is being opposed by the BF.
Visitors to the London Olympics are in for a torrid time.
One of the casualties of the War on Terror has been the passenger. The degradation of passengers and the arrogance and rudeness of the security personnel – especially at airports in Europe and the US are the hallmark of air-travel in the twenty-first century. Of course one of the requirements of the security staff these days is that they suspend what intelligence they may have and that they follow their instructions to the letter. They are thinking beings employed with the specific instruction not to think. Whether they have actually prevented any acts of terror will never be known. I suspect their successes are very few – if any at all.
It has led to a whole industry based on the precautionary principle and where the system cannot be shown to be successful. But for the manufacturers of screening equipment, the War on Terror provides a fantastic captive market. It is a market where their performance cannot be tested. The market size today for such equipment is around $200 billion annually and growing at about 15% every year. They will defend this market to the end and their well-paid lobbies will never allow the infiltration or return of any common-sense or customer-friendliness if it might threaten the sales of their equipment. It is the failings and inadequacies of their incredibly expensive equipment which require the removal of shoes, belts and other innocent paraphernalia to the embarrassment of the traveller. It is the idiocy and the rigidity of the instructions given to the security personnel which leads to their mindless insistence on the removal of paper and air tickets and currency from one’s pockets. It is their inability to distinguish between a bottle of water and “dangerous chemicals” which the poor traveller has to suffer. It is the passengers who have to bear the brunt of unthinking security personnel and the bad design of screening equipment.
Tags: BAA, Border Force, Heathrow, Home Office, IGI Airport, London Heathrow Airport, New Delhi, UK Border Agency
The k2p blog 