TravelingForMiles.com may receive commission from card issuers. Some or all of the card offers that appear on TravelingForMiles.com are from advertisers and may impact how and where card products appear on the site. TravelingForMiles.com does not include all card companies or all available card offers.
Other links to products and travel providers on this website will earn Traveling For Miles a commission that helps contribute to the running of the site. Opinions, reviews, analyses & recommendations are the author’s alone and have not been reviewed, endorsed, or approved by any of these entities. Terms apply to all credit card welcome offers, earning rates and benefits and some credit card benefits will require enrollment. For more details please see the disclosures found at the bottom of every page.
Following the introduction of ultra-modern scanners at various airports across the EU and the UK, the past 12 months saw the archaic restrictions on the volume of liquid passengers could carry in their hand baggage slowly being lifted.
Passengers were told that the next-generation CT scanners could now analyse liquids in vessels of up to 2 litres and that they were so sophisticated, most regular-size liquid-containing vessels could remain inside a passenger’s carry-on bags.
Things were looking good … until they weren’t.
Towards the beginning of June, the UK government suddenly announced that the 100ml restriction was being brought back with immediate effect, and while no government spokesperson ever made an official statement explaining this turnaround, various sources said that the reintroduction of restrictions was to “enable further improvements to be made to the new checkpoint systems” and that the change was not made in response to a specific threat.
Considering the rigorous testing that the new scanners were put through before their installation, it seemed odd that, suddenly, further improvements were required, but as no further details were given, we were left to guess what these improvements are.
Up until now, the European Union has been silent on this matter, but we’re now told that it too will bring back the 100ml restriction at airports where this rule had been lifted (airports with next-generation CT scanners).
Oddly, however, the rule isn’t being brought back immediately. It will only come back into effect from 1 September 2024.
This doesn’t make any sense.
If there’s an issue with the new scanners that could allow a person or persons with nefarious plans to breach airport security, the obvious thing to do would be to reintroduce the 100ml rule immediately.
So why is the EU not reintroducing the rule for another month?
Either there’s an issue with the scanners or there isn’t.
I can’t envisage any scenario under which it’s safe to keep using the scanners through the end of August but not from 1 September onwards.
It’s possible that the EU thinks that it’s doing travelers a favor by not reintroducing the 100ml rule until after most school vacations have come to an end and the busy summer travel season is starting to wind down, but what kind of message is this sending out?
If there’s a genuine issue with the scanners, it’s wholly unacceptable to keep the rules in place for a further month. What happens if this issue leads to an incident before the end of August?
How will anyone in authority be able to explain why they knowingly allowed a flaw in airport security to go unpatched just because they didn’t want to create any hold ups at a handful of airports?
If, however, it’s safe to continue using the scanners until the end of August (as the EU appears to be suggesting), why does the 100ml rule need to come back from the start of September? What is expected to happen on the night of 31 August that will make the new scanners untrustworthy?
I really have no idea what’s going on in the minds of the people making these decisions as I’m struggling to find any logic to this latest announcement. If any reader can highlight whatever it is that I’m missing, please enlighten me in the comments section.
If I was a cynic, I may wonder if something else other than security is at play here.
A cynic may wonder if the corporations that have made vast sums of money thanks to the 18 years of liquid restrictions have started to panic as the end of their golden goose comes into view and as a result, have put pressure on those in authority to extend the life of that goose.
I, of course, would never suggest such a thing … I’m just pointing out how a cynic may view this latest news.
It’s because of passenger confusion causing slowdowns and friction — caused because of the differences in equipment and in processes between airports and even sometimes differences between lines at a particular checkpoint area — in the context of there being the “one stop security” arrangement across a mix of countries with flights transiting the EU/Schengen area and pending expansion to countries that don’t have the CT cabin bag scanners in sufficient numbers quantities and won’t for a while (if ever).
I had covered this topic somewhere else a few ago when I caught drift of a pending change in airport security policies in the Schengen area.
Thanks for the explanation which, to a degree, makes sense. But it then raises the question of why the 100ml rule was lifted in the first place and why, if it’s causing so much confusion/friction, the EU is happy to keep the status quo until September (i.e. through the last super-busy travel month in Europe).