|"Travelers are facing full body scans, increased security and more expensive flights with the government announcing a $200 million plan to boost airport defence against terrorists" (Veness, 2010.The West Australian)
While I am all for increased security at airports, I wonder if these expensive X-Rays are the best use of those funds (200 million)?
The reason I say this is; has any aircraft departing internationally from Australian soil in the last 10 years actually been victim of a serious hijacking attempt?
I’m not talking about drunken crackpots that try hijacking the plane with a spoon and two dry biscuits, I talking about serious well planned para-military hijacking attempts.
The Trans Australia Airlines in the 60’s, and some disgruntled Qantas passengers in recent times spring to mind, but nothing coordinated.
“There have been no fatalities from hijacking of Australian aircraft” (Stewart & Mueller)
I suggest that it is more likely that an aircraft coming to Australia is much more likely to be hijacked, and having traveled through Asia recently, I know that in certain places the airport security leaves a lot to be desired. Thus it stands to reason that an Australian led push and monetary assistance to increase Airport security standards within the region, sky marshals (ASO)on all inbound flights, additional overseas HUMINT assets, and better training/screening for airport staff will have a greater “real world” effect on the security of Australian’s than X-Rays at Aussie airports.
All I’m saying is, has an in depth “cost-benefit assessment” been done and compared to other security improvements?
Or do you think that the Labour government wants some high tech shinny border security toys in the lead up to an election?
Does anyone have opinions on this?