M108 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules

TSR's model parliament.

Announcements Posted on
Please change your TSR password 23-05-2013
Sign in to Reply
  1. Metrobeans's Avatar
    • TSR Idol
    • Location: London
    • Posts: 9,552
    M108 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules, TSR Government
    This House believes that the 2006 security rules approved by the European Commission concerning mainly restrictions on liquids which can be taken into the cabin on flights originating from within the European Union, are unnecessary, avoidable and rather absurd and that the regulations in question should be taken into consideration again, possibly even repealed to the pre-2006 state.



    Notes
    To explain my point, I find it absurd that when I am going on a holiday, I can not take a harmless bottle of mouthwash with me, however I can take knives with blades shorter than 6 cm or scissors, again with blades shorter than 6 cm from the fulcrum. There is also an exception on infant food, which is then limited only by the maximum dimensions of your luggage.

    There are many different and even almost undetectable ways of conveying explosives and other weapons (for example, I highly doubt that the duty free shops are that carefully checked, so an organisation could smuggle the items by buying them from themselves), but they choose to irritate us, citizens willing to taste the liquids in front of them.

    I also believe that such strict rules and suggestions of terrorism behind every corner could lead to US-like security measures, where the TSA abuses passengers on daily basis, can open their luggage, destroy the locks without their presence or even use full body scanners and if they refuse, touch their genitals. The amount of people killed by terrorists is far lower than the amount of people killed in their own bathrooms by slipping on wet floor. It is just a form of political manipulation, really. Keeping people in fear for their career, as Dan Bull has said.

    Some additional reading: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/do...les_poster.pdf
  2. PierceBrosnan's Avatar
    • Peer Of The TSR Realm
    • Location: London, England
    • Posts: 1,409
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    Against, as much as I am Pro-EU this is one of the EU's more idiotic rules. Although, I can understand the pressurised containers part of that ruling.
    Last edited by PierceBrosnan; 13-07-2012 at 22:07.
  3. Morgsie's Avatar
    • TSR Idol
    • Location: Stoke-On-Trent
    • Posts: 9,042
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    A lot has happened since 2006, a European Aviation Safety Agency has been established.

    Please look at all EU Legislation before bringing legislation to this House.

    Here is a website for you, the European Commission Transport website: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/index_en.htm
    Last edited by Morgsie; 13-07-2012 at 18:57.
  4. Life_peer's Avatar
    • Peer Of The TSR Realm
    • Location: Slovak republic
    • Posts: 1,654
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    I am the writer.

    (Original post by Morgsie)
    A lot has happened since 2006, a European Aviation Safety Agency has been established.

    Please look at all EU Legislation before bringing legislation to this House.

    Here is a website for you, the European Commission Transport website: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/index_en.htm
    How is that relevant? These regulations are still in effect and I experienced them twice last month.
  5. Morgsie's Avatar
    • TSR Idol
    • Location: Stoke-On-Trent
    • Posts: 9,042
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    I am the writer.



    How is that relevant? These regulations are still in effect and I experienced them twice last month.
    You could have looked at newer Legislation, understanding it all is a different matter. I don't know if that is still in effect.

    I don't know much about it all TBH
    Last edited by Morgsie; 13-07-2012 at 19:20.
  6. tehFrance's Avatar
    • TSR Legend
    • Location: Londres
    • Warning points: 10
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    I didn't see this in the sub forum... that said, it is hand luggage and in the hand luggage you cannot have knives but you can in holding luggage, you cannot have mouthwash in either if I am correct.

    Against this motion.
  7. Life_peer's Avatar
    • Peer Of The TSR Realm
    • Location: Slovak republic
    • Posts: 1,654
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    You could have looked at newer Legislation, understanding it all is a different matter. I don't know if that is still in effect.

    I don't know much about it all TBH
    Then how can you assume that I have not? That is why I am telling you that these regulations are still in effect, which you can see here, for example.
  8. Life_peer's Avatar
    • Peer Of The TSR Realm
    • Location: Slovak republic
    • Posts: 1,654
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    I didn't see this in the sub forum... that said, it is hand luggage and in the hand luggage you cannot have knives but you can in holding luggage, you cannot have mouthwash in either if I am correct.

    Against this motion.
    You are not. As I have written, you can have knives with blades shorter than 6 cm in hand luggage as well as up to 100 ml of mouthwash in a single container, up to 1000 ml of all liquids combined. You can naturally put as much of it as you wish to the checked (hold) luggage.
  9. thunder_chunky's Avatar
    • And all the roads we have to walk are winding
    • Location: Eternia
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    But....but....but...baby milk is so dangerous! If you let baby milk on planes the terrorists win!
  10. thunder_chunky's Avatar
    • And all the roads we have to walk are winding
    • Location: Eternia
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    Btw I haven't ever had much problem with this personally. At most I've had water which I've had to thrown away to then buy water on the other side for inflated price. That said with things like mouthwash you don't have have that with you on a plane. I'm sure you can survive a plane journey without mouthwash.
    I think in this case the only issue is with baby milk in bottles. What else is so vital that it cannot wait mere hours until the destination has been reached? Excluding medicines I might add.
  11. jesusandtequila's Avatar
    • Overlord in Training
    • Posts: 3,086
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    Well, what with many airlines charging for hold baggage (not to mention the inconvenience of check baggage), then we face the stark choice between paying for a bag in the hold, or paying for a load of travel-sized toiletries. I'm not sure what the current risks are, or the effectiveness of screening liquids, my gut would say it's a bit over-bearing, but I'd like to look at things more clearly.

    Of course, all the stuff above is decisions that should be made by private companies, the airlines and the airport operators - not enshrined in law. As such, I'd support the repeal of the law.
  12. internetguru's Avatar
    • Banned
    • Posts: 3,453
    • Warning points: 1000
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    As usual the government are getting their priorities right.

    1. liquid on plane legislation

    2. celebrate jubilee motions

    .......

    99. economy/jobs/spending and all that useless stuff
  13. barnetlad's Avatar
    • Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
    • Location: Barnet
    • Posts: 4,507
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    There is one advantage to the current rules- it stopped Ryanair from a 'cabin baggage only' policy.

    For those of us that prefer a pleasant flying experience, the rules are non-sensical. Just require liquids to be placed separately in a clear plastic bag through scanning.
  14. Rakas21's Avatar
    • TSR Legend
    • Location: West Yorkshire
    • Posts: 11,808
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by internetguru)
    As usual the government are getting their priorities right.

    1. liquid on plane legislation

    2. celebrate jubilee motions

    .......

    99. economy/jobs/spending and all that useless stuff
    In addition to the number of other bills released (and a further 3+ in the next week).

    You are well aware from your time in government that we are announcing all our economic measures at the same time, in the budget to be released within the next two weeks (just finalizing the date).
  15. internetguru's Avatar
    • Banned
    • Posts: 3,453
    • Warning points: 1000
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    In addition to the number of other bills released (and a further 3+ in the next week).

    You are well aware from your time in government that we are announcing all our economic measures at the same time, in the budget to be released within the next two weeks (just finalizing the date).
    Ok well I'm just making sure, I don't want to see you play the weak sauce card real life parties play when they say they will do all their first election promises in their second term.
  16. Life_peer's Avatar
    • Peer Of The TSR Realm
    • Location: Slovak republic
    • Posts: 1,654
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    Btw I haven't ever had much problem with this personally. At most I've had water which I've had to thrown away to then buy water on the other side for inflated price. That said with things like mouthwash you don't have have that with you on a plane. I'm sure you can survive a plane journey without mouthwash. […]
    I used mouthwash just as an example because I need to have my dental care kit available at all times – checked luggage could get lost and returning it takes tens of hours.

    As an another example, and perhaps a more widely accepted one, people traveling only with cabin luggage are forced to either not carry liquids (e.g. alcoholic beverages as mentioned below) or buy them after the control point, usually more expensive.

    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    […] Of course, all the stuff above is decisions that should be made by private companies, the airlines and the airport operators - not enshrined in law. As such, I'd support the repeal of the law.
    I agree. In case of flights originating from within the EU, the law should only limit them from introducing inadequate measures.

    (Original post by barnetlad)
    There is one advantage to the current rules- it stopped Ryanair from a 'cabin baggage only' policy. […]
    From another point of view, it requires those who, for example, wanted to bring some booze with them as a form of gift to travel with two suitcases. Ideally, both options should be allowed.
    Last edited by Life_peer; 16-07-2012 at 09:22.
  17. Metrobeans's Avatar
    • TSR Idol
    • Location: London
    • Posts: 9,552
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    This is in cessation.
  18. Metrobeans's Avatar
    • TSR Idol
    • Location: London
    • Posts: 9,552
    Re: M105 - Motion on the EU Aviation Security Rules
    This has been withdrawn.
Sign in to Reply
Share this discussion:  
Article updates
Moderators

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 volunteers looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Reputation gems:
The Reputation gems seen here indicate how well reputed the user is, red gem indicate negative reputation and green indicates a good rep.
Post rating score:
These scores show if a post has been positively or negatively rated by our members.