Ryan Air About to Sue Britain over Ridiculous and Useless Security at Airports

Published on August 19th, 2006

Independent Online Edition > Business Analysis & Features — FYI

He points out that it is deemed now that a briefcase is safe to take on board, as hand baggage, but a carry-on wheely bag isn’t safe. “What’s the difference? The Department of Transport says ’smaller is safer’. No it’s not. It all goes through the same X-ray machine. It’s either safe or it’s unsafe.”

Mr O’Leary fumes that more than a week after the alleged terrorist plot was foiled, security at the airports is not back to normal. “It feels like Laurel and bloody Hardy are working at the Department of Transport coming up with these security measures.”

14 users responded in " Ryan Air About to Sue Britain over Ridiculous and Useless Security at Airports "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Paul said, on August 19th, 2006 at 7:27 am

I should add that the reason O’Leary is fuming so much is because the extra security restrictions around cabin baggage puts his Ryanair business model in trouble. He’s been pushing to eliminate hold luggage by keeping air fares down charging per checked-in item to keep turnaround time and baggage handling costs down. Mr O’Leary shouldn’t be held up as an example of an unbiased, altruistic commentator in security discussions.

# 2 god said, on August 19th, 2006 at 8:41 am

The only more boring than the usual patent-leather non-denials from neo-con incompetents — is the assorted heap of straw-man, statements of attainder, crappola kill the messenger dittohead dreck rallied to distract from the point of a Post.

O’Leary raises a point worthy of discussion. I could care less if he parts his hair on the wrong side.

# 3 Greg said, on August 19th, 2006 at 8:56 am

@ 2 – I have no idea what you just said. Did you copy it from one of those mumbo jumbo spam messages? (Dvorak wouldn’t know what I mean as he gets none)

Meanwhile, The Ryan Air guy is the only guy speaking about this security alert who I can understand, and who is looking at things from a common sense perspective.

At least he is not using the language of FEAR, with the fear music, voice and font.

# 4 Paul said, on August 19th, 2006 at 9:30 am

Not quite sure what god’s on… i wasn’t detracting from the problem and the debate. If you’re in the UK you’ll appreciate that O’Leary’s not afraid to strike up a bit of publicity especially when his airline has the most to lose from increased security. Sorry…. too cynical for you?

Besides the ’sue, sue, sue’ all detracts from the actual debate on how best to improve airport security without bringing Heathrow to a complete standstill… and I say that without the FEAR music

# 5 jbellies said, on August 19th, 2006 at 10:46 am

It’s just a detail, but I don’t think Ryan flies out of Heathrow. Its hub is Stansted. Last time I flew, the rail ticket from London (Liverpool Street Station) to Stansted was more expensive than the booked-ahead ticket price to Italy, most of which was tax anyway. Fortunately for me, at that time, Ryanair had no surtax for checked luggage. I wasn’t travelling for a weekend in the sun.

Sure, O’Leary has an axe to grind. That’s why his threat to sue might convince the security boffins to instigate rational measures rather than the hysterical response we’ve been getting. In general, it’s pretty difficult to sue the government in the UK, they have Draconian powers if they want to use them. So I’m thinking that this is just a publicity stunt. But it is a worthwhile one.

In this case the goat is on the right side (of the Atlantic) and the sheep are on the left….

# 6 Paul said, on August 19th, 2006 at 11:25 am

jbellies is quite right… don’t think Stansted had quite the problems of Heathrow but it still hit the low cost airlines that, as you say, often cost much less than the tax and the train fare.

It’ll be interesting to see whether this does become a real legal test or just the publicity stunt. It sounds like there’s a question of whether the bill that the government imposed the additional security (and thereby hassle) under completely repeals an earlier statute that gives airlines course for recompense.

Debate is good though… it was already taking an age to get through airports without the latest restrictions and threat.

# 7 Mike Voice said, on August 19th, 2006 at 11:48 am

4 Besides the ’sue, sue, sue’ all detracts from the actual debate on how best to improve airport security without bringing Heathrow to a complete standstill…

But isn’t that why he threatens to sue? Because there is no end in sight to the delays, while the “actual debate” is continuing?

Mr O’Leary fumes that more than a week after the alleged terrorist plot was foiled, security at the airports is not back to normal.

…the delays, long queues and cancellations that have resulted from a Government demand last week that all air passengers are body-searched – a fourfold increase on the previous level of such searches.

He announces that he has given the Government a week to get things back to normal or Ryanair will sue.

His threat to sue will only be tested if the British government is still requiring body-searches of all passengers more than 2 weeks after the “plot” was foiled.

If that is what it takes to get the “actual debate” off the stick, I’m all for it.

# 8 Greg said, on August 19th, 2006 at 12:23 pm

The reason I like this guy is,

He is a capitalist, he wants to make a buck, he makes no secret of this, he doesn’t pretend to be otherwise, you understand where he is coming from, unlike the politicians who have the twin goals of
1 – winning the actual war on terror.
2 – clinging to power in the face of their ineffectiveness in trying to do so.

Michael O’Leary also looking at the inconsistent security policies being applied and pointing out where they are stupid.

I took my mum to Heathrow today, and saw the stuff they were taking off people, it was just silly. One guy had to give up his 10ml bottle of eye drops, Me mum was threatened with the loss of here lipstick, yet you could take sandwiches onto the plane, – semtex on rye anyone?

As Michael O’Leary points out I could take a boot load of this stuff onto the tube or worse, the channel tunnel, make a big bang and be pretty happy with my day spent terrorising.

All these heightened security processes try to do is make the public scared and more malleable.

I think people are becoming more cynical about it all and these alerts will become more and more alarmist as a result.

# 9 Calvin said, on August 19th, 2006 at 12:28 pm

Ryan Air boss thinking of profit before safety. The British goverment and BAA want to tell The Ryan Air boss to take one of his planes and shove it up his arse!

# 10 joshua said, on August 19th, 2006 at 7:10 pm

The BAA is a joke, and so are the goverment rules for searching. O’Leary wants to keep making a buck, and so do BA and all the others, if they are smart they will all band together and sue the crap out of the BAA and the goverment.

BA told the BAA that they are going to sue them for hundreds of millions of pounds for lost revenue becuse they weren’t prepared to handle the chao’s of last week.
This came after the BAA told BA and the other airlines to cut back service 30% or be refused permission to land at their airports. They couldn’t keep up with the amounts of people that needed to be searched and the baggage increase when everything had to be stored in the hold that normally went into the cabin with the passenger. Instead of admitting that they had never been adequtley prepared for an emergancy due to their cost cutting the BAA has attempted to make it the fault of the various airlines. Sounds like the Mayor Nagin defense/offense….when caught with your pants down, blame the tailor.

# 11 joshua said, on August 19th, 2006 at 7:11 pm

Oh…and Ryan does fly out of Stansted, not Gatwick or Heathrow.

# 12 AB CD said, on August 19th, 2006 at 8:20 pm

Wish our airlines would do this.

# 13 Charbax said, on August 19th, 2006 at 8:23 pm

The whole terrorist plot thing is made up by neo-cons to try and win more elections, and make people support their middle-east war crimes.

All right-wing corrupt governments make up terrorist entertainment, cause they know it fills the news reports, frontpages, and makes the public completely blind from the atrocities and corrupted tax-cuts to the rich commited by thos governments.

Terror on TV = people support war on terror = Bush and co. pump all the oil they want and spend all the GDP + put the countries in debt on BS.

# 14 Mike Voice said, on August 19th, 2006 at 9:34 pm

9 Ryan Air boss thinking of profit before safety.

Searches and removal of liquids/gels are not what stopped the “plot”. They are a knee-jerk response to the plot.

We concentrate on air travel because the ones dumb enough to be caught seem to have an irrational fixation with one-upping their 9/11 heroes…

Continuing the body-searches and restrictions only serves to rub our noses in the fact that we were damned lucky to discover the plot and stop it…

The continuing searches and restrictions are a public admission that we have no idea who:
1. might be thinking about trying this,
2. is too stupid/stubborn to adapt their choice of weapon,
3. is just waiting for us to “relax our vigilence” so they can use the liquid/gel explosives they have at hand.

How is that supposed to make me feel “safer”?

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!