ASIA PACIFIC. The question on the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) website is concise and easily understandable – “Can transfer passengers bring their liquid items purchased at the airport at their previous port of call or onboard aircraft through the transfer security screening point at HKIA?”.
Currently, if the same question was asked at any EU, EEA or Swiss airport the answer would be a resounding “˜no’ if the passenger was coming from an airport outside those countries.
“It’s a a sensible harmonisation of standards being introduced for the bulk of our region’s member states“ |
RAKHITA JAYAWARDENA, President, Asia Pacific Travel Retail Association |
But in Hong Kong the answer is “˜yes’ – at least in the case of passengers coming from no less than (originally) 37 states – with New Zealand airports added to that list from last week. Australia (see below) will require gate delivery under its ‘Last Port of Call’ edict.
Airport Authority Hong Kong notes: “Liquid purchases that are in excess of 100ml may be allowed through the security screening point at HKIA upon satisfactory checks if they meet the following requirements:
• purchased from airports which have implemented the new requirements on the control of liquids (passengers are advised to check with their airlines on local requirements adopted at different countries) ; or
• purchased on board Hong Kong registered aircraft (Cathay Pacific Airways, Hong Kong Dragon Airlines, Hong Kong Express Airways, Hong Kong Airlines and Oasis Hong Kong Airlines); or
• purchased on board non-Hong Kong registered aircraft whose previous port of call is an airport which has implemented the new requirements on the control of liquids; and
Liquid purchases are packed in a sealed plastic bag that is both tamper-evident and display satisfactory proof of purchase on the day(s) of the journey.
The Hong Kong initiative seems an eminently sensible compromise on the transfer issue, one that effectively recognises the security of the compliance of the duty free system and supply chain across some 40 originating countries – and in time any country that introduces the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) guidelines.
South Korea and Taiwan have gone down a similar route, in each case with even fewer restrictions than Hong Kong. But Japan and Australia have ruled against transit LAGs over 100ml being allowed (for international transferring passengers).
When Airport Authority Hong Kong announced the first 37 exemptions to the transfer confiscation rule, Asia Pacific Travel Retail Association (APTRA) President Rakhita Jayawardena rightly described it as “a sensible harmonisation of standards being introduced for the bulk of our region’s member states”.
He said that the new measures retained the vital security element, but also allowed “freer movement of duty free LAG (liquids, aerosols, gels) purchases from state to state”.
Apart from its interpretation of the transit issue, HKIA’s measures are similar to those of Europe and in line with the ICAO guidelines gradually being adopted around the world.
Its explanation of those rules (click here to read) is the best The Moodie Report has seen, carefully and clinically explaining the new regime and anticipating virtually any customer reaction by asking and answering a series of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).
So, in short, if UK-bound traveller “˜A’ departs from Sydney where he buys a bottle of Johnnie Walker Black Label and transits through HKIA, he will be able to retain that bottle (provided it is in a secure tamper evident bag that displays satisfactory proof of purchase on the day(s) of the journey). But if UK-bound traveller “˜B’ departs from Sydney (or any non-EU airport) and buys a bottle of Johnnie Walker Black Label and transits through, say, Frankfurt Airport (or any EU airport), he will have the whisky confiscated at the transit point.
“Athough Hong Kong and others have accepted transfer passengers from the EU and other countries… there will be no reciprocal arrangement with the EU. At least, not until the EU and Hong Kong agree a bi-lateral on security regimes “ |
KEITH SPINKS, Secretary General, European Travel Retail Council |
The latter is purely and simply because there is no bi-lateral agreement covering the issue between Hong Kong and the EU. But despite the lack of any such agreements, Hong Kong is saying that the safeguard element of the ICAO recommendations being in place is enough to permit transfer LAGs to be carried.
So if Hong Kong and South Korea and Taiwan can do that, why can’t other airports?
In some cases they will. APTRA’s Jayawardena noted last week: “With Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand waiting to introduce the ICAO LAGs guidelines, the procedures released by Airport Authority Hong Kong, it is hoped, may be considered (and introduced) in those states. I then believe most other states (within the region) will follow suit.”
That in turn would mean “less heartache and disappointment for the transferring passenger” he said.
But others – most critically in Europe – will not. European Travel Retail Council Secretary General Keith Spinks told The Moodie Report today (Saturday): “There is nothing stopping any country from adopting similar rules [to Hong Kong’s] but the EU and US have made it clear that they will still not accept transfer passengers from outside the EU with duty free LAGs unless they have certified that the security programmes in place at any third country airport meet their required standards, particularly on the supply chain security and staff screening procedures.
“So, as of today, although Hong Kong and others have accepted transfer passengers from the EU and other countries through transfer security with their LAGs, there will be no reciprocal arrangement with the EU. At least, not until the EU and Hong Kong agree a bi-lateral on security regimes and that will take some time.”
Interestingly, Spinks highlights a section of the ICAO guidelines which notes: “States may also wish to consider exemptions in respect of liquids purchases either at airport duty free shops, or on board aircraft, on the condition that the liquid is packed in a sealed plastic bag that is both tamper evident and displays satisfactory proof of purchase at airport duty free shops, or on board aircraft, on the day(s) of the journey for departing as well as
transfer passengers.”
At its very essence, Hong Kong has allowed such exemptions, the EU and US have not – in the latter cases bi-laterals will be needed first. And don’t hold out any optimistic expectations that the EU will change tack, Spinks warns. “Not a hope! The Commission negotiates on behalf of the EU as a whole and they have already specified that bi-laterals can only be agreed if they are satisfied with individual third country airports’ security procedures.”
SINGAPOREAN GATE DELIVERY COMES AS A SURPRISE
Meanwhile this week’s news revealed by The Moodie Report that Singapore Changi Airport has implemented gate delivery of duty free liquids to purchasers flying to Australia has come as a major surprise to duty free lobbyists.
The move underlines the high value of the Australia-bound business to Changi – and to many travel retailers. Australians are excellent purchasers of a number of liquor categories, notably bourbon, rum, white spirits, liqueurs and Scotch whisky.
 |
 |
DFS Group’s acclaimed liquor shops at Changi Airport can still sell to passengers bound for Australia but the goods are now being delivered to the gates. It’s a tiresome, expensive but necessary initiative |
With its crucial liquor & tobacco concession set to be awarded in May after an ultra-competitive bid, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore can hardly sit back and watch such a significant slice of the business disappear overnight with the 31 March introduction of the Australian “˜last port of call and gate delivery’ edict. So it has reacted with impressive speed and implemented a gate delivery system that has proven hugely demanding as well as expensive.
So if a traveller takes a London Heathrow-Singapore Changi-Perth routing, he or she can only buy their duty free liquor at Changi, where it will be gate delivered. But that expensive bottle of Balvenie malt bought in Heathrow T3 will be seized at Changi. Now it’s a case of European airports having their sales seized (if they continue to make them) rather than doing the seizing.
Australia has waived the gate delivery rule for its trans-Tasman neighbour New Zealand. Will it widen that exemption? Many airports and retailers will be hoping so. But with the country offering well-stocked arrivals shops at every airport, the Australian authorities won’t be in any hurry.
MORE ON THE AVIATION SECURITY CRISIS
Australian off-airport duty free gains last-minute liquid reprieve – 30/03/07
APTRA update: New countries introduce aviation security regulations – 30/03/07
MEPs take campaign over airline liquids direct to Transport Ministers – 30/03/07
EU Commission addresses travel retail industry – optimism but no instant solutions – 29/03/07
