Fingerprinting compulsory at LHR terminal 1

[10secondsurvey]

from the BA website: "The British Airports Authority has introduced a common departure lounge to allow International and UK Domestic transferring customers to use the same superior retail, leisure and dining facilities airside in Terminal 1. To comply with Border and Immigration Agency and airport security regulations, biometric information is required when transferring from international flights onto UK Domestic flights"

' biometric information consisting of electronic fingerprinting and a facial digital photograph'

Does anyone know firstly, does this only apply to BA flights at LHR T1, and can it be avoided by not using flight connections (quite frankly I don't trust the goons with my name, never mind my fingerprints).

I'm not sure what anyone else thinks, but to me, getting fingerprinted is what happens when you commit a criminal offence in the UK.

If this becomes mandatory with BA, it'll be another good reeason not to use them.

Mind you, those 'superior retail, leisure and dining facilities' sound interesting.

[The_Banking_Scot]

Hi,

At the moment, in Gatwick North ( LGW) Domestic passengers are photographed as they are using the same lounge as International pax. IIRC there was a sign saying the photos were kept for 24hours then destroyed. I'm not sure if similar arrangements will be in place at LHR T1.

At the new LHR T5 domestic pax will have thier right hand fingers scanned and a photo taken. ( my experience during the recent trials)

Regards

TBS

[10secondsurvey]

Thanks

I'm flying via term 1 with BA soon, so I'll just come out, and then go back in, rather than use flight connections.

I personally do not believe the biometric data will be destroyed after 24 hours, despite what is said, and I think this is just the thin end of the wedge on a road to a police state where ID cards are compulsory, with all your biometric data.

I really strongly resent giving my fingerprints just so BAA can make a bit more cash from duty free sales. My next flight might just be my last with BA.

[bealine]

If you have nothing to hide, why are you so worried?

Is it because this smacks of the former Eastern Bloc movement controls where, unless you had very special permission, you were forbidden to travel more than 50 km from home?

I used to have the attitude that I had nothing to fear from my own government, but after the way they seem to be using technology to target every little pettifogging thing, and controlling everything you do, I am getting a trifle concerned too!

.........but you are wrong to blame BA, you will shortly have to do the fingerprinting thing if you fly with BMI or any other airline on a domestic route!

The wonderful idiots at the DFT have spoken!

We are accepting far too much cr4p in the false name of security!

[Haven't a clue]

My kids school have introduced fingerprint scanners to maintain the attendance register. Registration is now apparantly a legal requirement (presumably on the back of the anti-truancy campaign by government) and schools must check the kids are there twice a day. Teachers like the system because taking the register used to take some time - and checking authorised or advised absences (sick etc) took even more of this precious commodity. Smart salesmen have even extolled the virtues of the system beyond registration - telling schools that when extended to act as a purchase authorisation system at the school cafeteria (kid takes what he wants, submits fingerprint to pay) food sales rise significantly.

In short another wonderful technical innovation!

Some parents are up in arms - do we have the right to allow our child's identity to be captured in this way without their informed consent. Others simply don't trust the soothing and reassuring messages from the system provoders who tell us that the way it works is to calculate a unique number from 8 or so key elements of the child's fingerprint and it is this number which is stored, not the fingerprint itself. Turns out of course that this unique number can be used (obviously) by others to match a finger print....

But if as someone has said why should I be worried? Well here's always the probablity that my or my kids fingerprint may well be found at a crime scene in a public place simply because crime can occur anywhere, and we might simply be the one of any number of people who have passed through. Currently we are unlikely to be bothered by the boys in blue, but if our prints exist on a database created from sources such as T5 or the school we will no doubt have to waste sometime proving our innocent position.

So I suspect that once the system is up and running the "establishment" will quietly link it up to their systems and use it in a similar way that Echelon (or whatever the GCHQ communications monitoring software is called) alledgedly constantly monitors phone traffic. And no doubt facial recognition software applied to CCTV images is constantly monitoring our movements....

Unfortunately there seems to be no alternative available to pax affected. If you want to travel this way, you will have to allow fingerprints to be taken.

There was a guy on Radio 4 this morning suggesting that the surveilance state had now gone too far and some measures in place should be rolled back. This abuse of fingerprinting should be first to go!

[A2QFI]

There was a dreadful case where a Scottish PC was stitched up by having her fingerprints planted at a crime scene by her "colleagues" She fought it and was awarded exemplary damages. See below.

Nobody gets my DNA or fingerprints as part of routine travel and I wont be having or carrying an ID card.

Last night the officers’ fears were dismissed as “far fetched” by a source close to the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, which is driving the new plan forward.

But the possibility of framing police officers is an extremely sensitive issue for the force. A policewoman lost her job after being wrongly accused of leaving her fingerprint at a murder scene. All officers already have to provide fingerprints as a condition of appointment.

Former Strathclyde WPC Shirley McKie was accused of contaminating the scene of the murder of Ayrshire woman Marion Ross, who was found stabbed at her Kilmarnock home in January 1997.

McKie maintained that although she was one of the first officers to arrive at the scene, she had never been in Ross’s house.

Despite the defence argument that the murder scene had been contaminated by police incompetence, David Asbury was convicted on other fingerprint evidence and sentenced to life imprisonment. But 10 months after the conviction, McKie was charged with perjury and suspended by Strathclyde Police for allegedly lying on oath, although she was later fully acquitted.

[Final 3 Greens]

Funnily enough, I chose LH from Malta to Edinburgh yesterday, to avoid transiting London.

Looks like that decision had an unintended benefit.

All I can say is that LH will be getting more of my business and BA will be losing out.

[PAXboy]

The photo thing at LGW is picked up from MAN. I have only used it once in [scratches brain] 2001 and that was also due to a shared lounge. I thought it sensible as a photo that is time stamped and the location obvious is not a problem.

So I presume that the DfT will implement more and more US inspired procedures? Yes. Will they make any difference to any future attacks? No. Will they make a difference to any future statements by politicians .... ahhhh, now you're talking.

[Woofrey]

Banking Scot - The photo thing has been at Gatwick North and South for a long, long time, I think they were the first to develop a common lounge for domestic and international pax, and this was one of the conditions imposed by the government security agencies at the time.

10 Second - You're not giving your fingerprint to BAA so they can make more tax free sales. 1) it's the Border and Immigration Agency who want this, BAA have to operate it and 2) simply don't buy then !

There are a number of ways of looking at this :

From the airport operators point of view they can save money by not having to build segregated domestic departure zones and manning separate security channels for these. On the other hand they do have to have extra security staff to check photos before boarding.

From the pax viewpoint, you now have the opportunity to buy at tax free prices. You don't have to take it, but I suspect tax free sales for domestic pax are quite healthy as most people like to save money when they can. They'll always be a few moaning minnies going on about the shops, but I don't think they understand the economics of the airport operation.

On the arrivals side, the airport operator has to incur additional expenditure to provide dedicated domestic arrivals facilities. I think this is due to customs and immigration not wanting domestic pax mixing with internationals, and also the civil liberties brigade going on about not being subject to customs and immigration when travelling internally, i.e. this doesn't happen at railway stations.

All of these would happen regardless of the security threat which has simply exacerbated the situation and made more excuses readily available to the authorities.

Of course, if you don't like it, you can always take the train ( which may be just a quick city centre to city centre in some cases ).

[Haven't a clue]

Woofrey:

From the airport operators point of view they can save money by not having to build segregated domestic departure zones and manning separate security channels for these

On the arrivals side, the airport operator has to incur additional expenditure to provide dedicated domestic arrivals facilities

So the whole thing is a plot to eliminate domestic air travel which is a major inconvenience to airport operators??:}

Given the dreadful performance by BAA in dealing with dealing with increased security requirements, I wouldn't really be surprised......

[Woofrey]

Well that's one way of looking at it, but perhaps only from the perspective of the larger airports WITH international connecting pax ?

I don't think the photo / fingerprinting stuff happens at Edinburgh but they have a common lounge, ( but I'm prepared to be corrected ).

I think the issue at Gatwick occured when space became a problem at South and it was decided to use the whole terminal for "one process" and the relatively simple photo reconciliation exercise was devised.

All of this was long before the 10-8-2006 security shambles......

As for arrivals, the South domestic baggage reclaim area is a great example of shoe horning a solution into b***** all space...

[bealine]

From the pax viewpoint, you now have the opportunity to buy at tax free prices. You don't have to take it, but I suspect tax free sales for domestic pax are quite healthy as most people like to save money when they can. They'll always be a few moaning minnies going on about the shops, but I don't think they understand the economics of the airport operation.

I think the "moaning minnies" understand the economics perfectly well! Airport shopping provides loadsamoney for the BAA, bu66er all for the poor retailers who usually operate at a loss in order to offset tax liabilities and allegedly reduces the fees for the airlines!

If you look at this document, the charges to airlines are pretty outrageous (hence Michael O'Leary's laying off of staff for the winter!) and if BAA can't make a decent profit without renting out shops then there's something amiss with their business - Oh wait! Why did Ferrovial want to buy it?

http://www.baa.com/assets/B2CPortal/Static%20Files/LHR_cou2007_08.pdf

Don't hold your breath over the "Tax Free Prices" on offer! Check out Tesco, Sainsbury's, Waitrose or Asda - you'll find their prices are cheaper including Tax!

[Donkey497]

Having spent about as much time in the Edinburgh Departure Lounge as my own front room in the past six months en-route to various places domestic & foreign, I really can't recall ever having any photographs taken, let alone fingerprints being taken.

I have to admit, it tends to happen quite a lot when I arrive at the next airport which tends to be ATL (for preference) or EWR (when there's no alternative). Haven't had this treatment at Stansted or Oslo or Schipol though, and they all have common domestic and international lounges.

So if BAA don't need to fingerprint you or photgraph you in Edinburgh or Stansted, why is is necessary at Heathrow or Gatwick? [Or even Manchester?]

Here is where the conspiracy theories start.......:eek::eek::eek:

What I don't understand is that Heathrow is a big enough Pain In The A** [the capitals are fully justified, IMHO] at the best of times without adding yet another layer of dubious "security" to create further unneeded and unnecessary queues, frustration, anger and disillusionment.:(:{:(:{

Could it be a case that BAA fear a lightning raid on their precious Duty Free by a marauding band of Domestic Pax, determined on liberating a volume of liquid in excess of 100mL each, who might then make good their escape via the domestic air-bridges..........


Honestly, I despair of BAA Heathrow [mis]management. They surely cannot fail to know how much their customers loathe and detest the whole experience of passing through their establishment which so effectually serves to tarnish the soul, and then they come up with yet another winning idea like this? How much is this pointless exercise costing, that could be better spent in redecorating some needy areas or upgrading other parts to a 1970's standard from the existing 1940's level.

What next?

Only time will tell. Place your bets now on:
Samples of DNA needed before entering the Security Screening Channel, Cash bonds to be posted prior to using an e-Ticket machine.
Deposit of your first born child with a Government Agency prior to actual flight.

[Skipness One Echo]

There has to be a loophole at Gatwick that requires domestic passengers to have their photo taken. Common lounge and LGW, EDI and STN for domestic and International and yet only LGW has had this annoying secondary check before you can access the domestic gates. Anyone know why? There has to be a REAL reson why DFT insists LGW play this game and yet STN and EDI are secure. What is the justification for the fingerpinting at T5? Anyone?

[PAXboy]

Only LGW?? In 2001, I did a day trip EDI-MAN and back and was photo'ed at MAN for the return. The signs said that the pic was retained for 24 hours and, of course, I believed them. :}

On passing through LGW for IOM last year (twice) also snapped. Fortunately, the LTN~IOM route is open again now and I can avoid BAA.

[Haven't a clue]

Photos have been taken at MAN T3 for as long as I can remember, and LGW N & S (and of arriving pax at LGW S gates 1-10).

My understanding is that it is an immigration issue, not a customs or security driven policy. As has been said elsewhere they do it to ensure that a person in transit cannot jump onto a domestic flight and thus avoid the scrutiny of immigration. As we can print out our boarding cards anywhere in the world, such a move is possible. It suits the airport operators to combine both international and domestic pax - one terminal area, one security point, all have access to shops etc. LHR T1 had its own domestic section and no photos. Presumably all LHR domestic pax are now being put through the international security and with access to all T1 gates.

Perhaps the reason for the lack of photos at EDI etc is because international arrivals cannot transit airside, and must clear immigration before any onward journey?

I wonder what would happen if we became part of the EU Shengen (?sp?) common travel area.....

[groundhand]

For photos, add Bournemouth, the last time I was through every passenger was had a photo taken at check-in.

As for fingerprinting, for several years it has been a requirement for all staff ID's at Airports de Paris (ORY & CDG). Made getting through security controls very efficient, put finger on scanner, photo of 'owner' comes onto screen and off you go.

A couple of years ago there was a scheme at MAN T2 for opting for an iris scan and finger print to enable automatic HMI control; don't know what happened to it as I've not been through T2 for a while. Looked like a good system as it allowed you to miss the queues for HMI control - or whatever it's called these days!

GH

[Skipness One Echo]

Are we really saying punters don't clear UK Passport Control before access to the Departure Lounge, I find that hard to believe. Passport Control is the first thing you come across surely. Anyone KNOW?

[Haven't a clue]

At MAN arrive at T3 and skip up the steps to the departure lounge for transit. I used to do it all the time - all you need is a boarding card for the security point. Then they introduced the photos...

Arriving at LGW S 1-10 after the usual BAA route march you bear right through a photo checkpoint. Bear left takes you straight to the departure lounge. No checkpoint at all.

At LHR routing through Flight Connections to T1 domestic took you to an immigration point. Thus no photos.

Can't speak for anywhere else.

[Skipness One Echo]

Are we allowing people who have not been granted access to the UK to mingle with outbound passengers? Thought that was not allowed due to the enforced segregation of incoming and outgoing passenegers. I ask because I got lost looking for my gate at LHR last June in Terminal 3 and because Pier 7 is not segregated, the little black guy with the BAA dayglo made me go back to the lounge via FLIGHT CONNECTIONS !! Nearly missed the bloody flight.

[Haven't a clue]

AFAIK that's what happens with transit pax at LHR all the time!

[Donkey497]

Haven't a Clue wrote:

Perhaps the reason for the lack of photos at EDI etc is because international arrivals cannot transit airside, and must clear immigration before any onward journey?

I wonder what would happen if we became part of the EU Shengen (?sp?) common travel area.....


Been through quite a few schengen transits recently - never had photograph 1 taken, never had fingerprint 1 taken or digit 1 scanned.

I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but it seems we are rapidly heading for the proverbial big brother society here in the UK & the last place that got out of hand was............

[10secondsurvey]

Just for clarification, the fingerprinting is used for pax using BA transiting from a foreign originating flight to Terminal 1 domestic. It is done in flight connections. Yesterday, I arrived into T1 and rather than using fast track in flight connections, I went to arrivals instead, then went through security in T1 domestic. One advantage (a major advantage to me) with BA was that when flying club, and going via flight connections, there was the BA fast track, but of course to use that now, I'd have to let the goons take my fingerprints (which I ain't doing).

So, in future, as the advantage with BA has gone, my choice of flights will vary, and BA will lose out. In addition, the fingerprinting nonsense is also going to be standard practice in the super duper duper (if we believe the hype) T5.

Woofrey, it is explained on the BA website, as being the following;

'This procedure is needed as the British Airports Authority has introduced a common departure lounge to allow International and UK Domestic transferring customers to use the same retail, leisure and dining facilities in Terminal 1.'


So, it is not for security, but so we can all access the 'enhanced' leisure retail opportunities.

This current government want to know too too much about everyone. It is dangerous for democracy, and freedom. Those who say, it's ok, it's not important, are deluding themselves. In any democracy, totalitarianism is just around the corner, and drip by drip, the changes happen, until suddenly everyone realises what has happened and it too late. Maybe it is symbolic that of all countries in Europe, nobody in the UK has experienced totalitarianism in any recent history, but ask people from Germany, Portugal, italy or Spain (the most recent), and they know what it is like.

I am a totally law abiding citizen, but I think the clowns at LHR are just abusing an individuals right to freedom and privacy under the law. If other airlines start requiring fingerprints, then I'll use different airports. If it become compulsory everywhere, then I will know freedom and democracy is dead.

The case highlighted by A2QFI above, is also an important reason, which everyone should read up on. Essentially, if they have your prints, they might well find you guilty of a crime by mistake (or intentionally!) - and it ain't easy to appeal positive ID from fingerprint evidence, as juries think it is 100% proof of guilt. There are many links and detil on the story, partly unveiled by BBC Panorama, at;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5112568.stm

Anyway, the bottom line is, the advantage of using BA is lost for me now, so I'll use others instead, and although I'm one of their frequent flyers, I'm sure they won't really care, as is evidenced by their recent response to a pax problem in business traveller magazine.