Perhaps this may be the case but the law isn't clear.
And if the law ain't clear then enforcement officers won't know what they should be doing.
And if the law ain't clear then enforcement officers won't know what they should be doing.
I don't think they care anyway - look at the "permission to fly" business with Special Branch... The problem with the Terrorism Act is that absolutely nobody is going to argue with them because they can just arrest you and lock you up for weeks, without any evidence.
I sent a copy of the HMRC document to my pal in Special Branch here in the Isle of Man. Here is his reply, not completely definitive:
I have read the document you sent me several times and yes agree it isn't very clear. After consultation with people on a higher pay grade than me, we believe that there is no change with the requirements/protocol that is already in force. In essence keep doing what you were doing regarding flying in and out of the Isle of Man.
I fly out of a private strip so I make sure they get at least 12 hours notice of my flights.
Ian
If you're ever up at Andreas while we're operating, be sure to drop by :-)
alioth Will do, I'm only 2 miles away. What's your e mail address. Ian
This could end badly for us all, more freedom being eroded. This article is from a national paper sent to me this morning by a concerned Helicopter owner pilot friend:
TERRORISTS and dangerous criminals can take advantage of an “incredible” hole in border security and secretly enter Britain, MPs have warned.
Members of the Commons’ Public accounts committee expressed grave concern about the Home Office’s failure to check passports of passengers who arrive in light aircraft or private jets.
Sir Charles Montgomery, director general of the Border Force, told the committee he was working on solutions to improve checks on small planes – known as “general aviation” – but admitted some arrivals are not examined by his officials.
In a session of the committee examining the Border Force’s performance, Richard Bacon MP asked: “When a private plane lands at an airport it is possible for someone to get off and get into the country without being checked?" Sir Charles replied: “Yes, it is."
Mr Bacon said the security flaw was “frankly incomprehensible”, adding: “I find it very odd that on the £600 million available you can’t deploy enough resource to cover all the planes. It is incredible."
Steve Barclay MP, another member of the committee, said afterwards: “I think it is staggering that we allow private flights into the country without passenger information being provided and without the occupants of those aircraft being seen by immigration officers. What is to stop a convicted killer or a terrorist coming into this country?" There are an estimated 8,500 private aircraft and up to 500 “landing sites” in Britain, which can range from farmers’ fields to regional airports.
The security flaw was highlighted in a National Audit Office report, which was discussed by MPs yesterday, which said: “At Luton airport, for example, around 1,000 private flights arrive annually. “The Border Force is aware that advance information it receives on passengers arriving at UK ports by private planes and boats is far from comprehensive and in more than one port we visited, Border Force officers told us that when it was supplied, such passenger information could be inaccurate." Sir Charles said he was unable to provide a figure on how many general aviation flights arrive in Britain each year. Lord Carlile QC, a former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, voiced concern about security problems surrounding general aviation in a report in 2006. Two years later, he said thousands of small, rented planes capable of travelling at high speeds between European Union countries and the UK should be subjected to stricter checks. In the committee session in the Commons, Sir Charles said he was examining whether the Border Force could charge airport operators for providing passport checks for general aviation.
• John Vine, the Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, said that dangerous criminals who have been deported are able to fly back to Britain unchecked because of failings in the £500 million e-Borders IT project. Mr Vine’s review also found 650,000 alerts about drug smuggling and other contraband were deleted without being read because border guards have been ordered to prioritise immigration checks.
That was a stupid Daily Telegraph article, whose "ex Daily Trash" writer omitted to mention that a criminal with more than 2 braincells could more easily steal a boat in France and sail across, than get a lift from a GA pilot...
I can't see a pilot just picking up a "hitchiker". And if he has the brains to get a PPL, and money to buy a plane, he will much more easily get a fake passport and fly in on Ryanair...
This is heading in a very bad direction.
This is one of those things that if we weren't pilots, we might well think there a point there. But how many people do enter illegally via light aircraft? How many people enter illegally popping in to any coastal area from a small boat, descended from a large boat? No one really knows I suppose. But I'd hazard a guess that most large crimes in people or product smuggling happen through the channels where there is already a high security presence anyhow (think allegedly large quantities of dodgy substances going undetected through the postal system, or people managing to get through on lorries crossing the channel).
So what could they do? They could send a local officer to a GA airfield or farm strip on the back of a GAR form (though as other has said, a smuggler is hardly likely to fill out a GAR form anyhow), but this would mean tighter compliance with the times we say we will arrive back, meaning more hassle when a flight is delayed or brought forward.
They could attempt somehow to monitor inbound aircraft traffic and somehow weasel out those without a flight plan (possible I guess but maybe there are other issues (e.g. determining the size of an aircraft and its load carrying potential based on aircraft reg number)).
Or they could force us to stop off at Lydd, Shoreham or whatever larger GA airfield exists on the route back, but for those who don't fly from such airport, that would take the fun out of a quick hop over the channel and whack up the costs.
Oh it came from the Telegraph, whose writer came from the Mail. I hadn't realised it wasn't a serious piece of journalism ;-)
