Coronavirus is putting us off our trip to the Canaries

Simon Calder answers your questions about the current outbreak, duty-free spirits, liquids on flights and South African Airways

La Gomera is the only Canary island so far with a confirmed case (Getty/iStock)

Q We are meant to be flying with easyJet on 25 February to the Canary Islands. Because of the coronavirus we are choosing not to fly; we both have health conditions and there has been reports of the Canary Islands having the virus already. But easyJet won’t give a refund, and say all they can offer is a refund of the air passenger duty which is £26 and an insurance letter. Is this right? Where do we stand, and where do we go with this?

Name supplied

A Sorry to hear about your decision. I hope I can persuade you to change your mind. One case of the Wuhan coronavirus has been identified on the lovely island of La Gomera, to which easyJet does not fly.

The only conceivable risk from the virus in the Canary Islands that I can see would involve going to that island, seeking out people with whom the unfortunate victim has been close, and spending a significant length of time in close proximity to them. On the basis that this is not your plan, there is no reason at all to worry. If I may say so, it would make more sense to cancel because you fear being struck by lightning.

Because there is no measurable risk, easyJet, of course, has no obligation to provide a refund. So please don’t cancel the trip. Late February is an excellent time to be in the archipelago, and there are few threats to fret about; I trust you would not be renting a car, given your aversion to risk.

If you are set on cancelling, you may be able to transfer some of the value of the easyJet flights to another traveller, for use on future trips on any route the airline flies, which could mitigate the loss. Go online to “manage my booking” and pay a £32 charge per flight (plus any increase in fare). This works best if the original tickets were quite expensive and the new flights are of a similar value. And at least I can save you the trouble of contacting your travel insurer. The firm will undoubtedly decline any claim because of the absence of danger.

But I hope I have persuaded you to continue your trip.

Skip the duty-free and buy your booze on arrival in Adelaide (iStock)

Q I am going to Adelaide in a few weeks on Emirates from Manchester via Dubai. If I buy spirits at Manchester airport will I be able to take them on my connecting flight from Dubai to Adelaide?

Susan S

A The “Lags” rules (liquids, aerosols, gels) were brought in during 2006 following a plan to blow up planes. The plot involved assembling bombs in flight from ingredients brought through airport security. Global regulations currently ban anything that can vaguely be classed as a liquid except in very small quantities: 100ml. The rules are intended to prevent terrorists bringing liquids on board a plane in sufficient quantities to be able to carry out the plan of improvising an explosive device.

The aviation world (or rather governments) have deemed that the threat can be avoided by limiting each passenger’s liquids to containers with a maximum of 100ml, inside a clear plastic bag that has a volume of no more than one litre. The stipulation excludes all normal-sized bottles. There has been a half-hearted move to standardise the process for allowing liquids bought in an official airport duty free shop to be taken through security checkpoints elsewhere in the world. The idea is that bottles of spirits are placed in a “Security Tamper-Evident Bag” (Steb). This is a bag made of thick, clear plastic which is sealed after purchase, with a receipt indicating the place of purchase.

Some travellers successfully negotiate security checkpoints when in transit after arriving from a foreign airport. But I hear countless stories of airline passengers who are changing planes en route and finding that their expensive gin or malt whisky is confiscated. Furthermore, if there is flight disruption it adds risk that you will lose them.

So buy what you need at Dubai airport (which I believe is cheaper than Manchester). Or, better still, wait until Adelaide – Australia is one of the few countries that adopts the sensible practice of allowing inbound international travellers to buy upon arrival. As concern grows about environmental issues, I think the subject of travellers carrying liquids halfway around the world is up for debate.

The current rules came into effect in the summer of 2006 (Getty)

Q I recently travelled through Gatwick airport. I was told I could only carry one plastic bag of my toiletries. The rest had to go in the hold or get thrown. I want to know where that rule is from, and why. Do you know?

Name withheld

A The ban on large quantities of so-called Lags (liquids, aerosols and gels) came into effect in the summer of 2006. In August of that year, the UK authorities revealed that a group of would-be suicide bombers were plotting to smuggle chemicals on board transatlantic flights. They planned to assemble explosives from liquids brought abroad in soft-drink containers, and then blow up the aircraft.

As with the hijackings and mass murder of 2001, the perpetrators were taking advantage of a loophole in aviation security. The 9/11 terrorists passed through the checkpoints legally, carrying the blades that would allow them to take over aircraft and use the planes as weapons of mass destruction.

The “liquid bomb” plotters were using the absence of any limit on the amount of fluid that could be taken through security checkpoints.

When the plan was uncovered, the immediate reaction of the security services was to ban all liquids from flying – even including ink in ballpoint pens.

Within weeks the current rules were devised. Travellers can take liquids in containers of 100ml or less in a clear plastic bag with a volume of no more than one litre. The theory is that someone seeking to smuggle dangerous liquids on board would not be able to carry a sufficient quantity to create a viable improvised explosive device.

Ever since, travellers have faced strict limits in preparing to take everything from cosmetics to cheese on board planes.

Were passengers allowed to take multiple bags, the argument goes, they could bring enough explosive material on board to jeopardise the aircraft. That is why the one-bag rule applies.

Except, in my experience, in Israel, which has a remarkably light-touch attitude to the liquids rule – but only after departing passengers have been very thoroughly interviewed by security staff.

Cape Town: it’s clear South Africa’s government won’t let the national carrier fail (Getty/iStock) (iStock)

Q I have flights booked with South African Airways in April. Should I be worried by recent developments and flight cancellations? Is there any reason to be proactive, and cancel and book on another airline now?

Mark H

A Pity the poor taxpayer from Cape Town to Pretoria. For decades they have subsidised the losses of the inefficient and underperforming national airline. It is impossible to say how much has been pumped into South African Airways, because the carrier has not published its financial results since 2017, when it lost the equivalent of £145m – about £15 for every passenger flown.

Hundreds of millions more have been squandered keeping the airline afloat, rather than being invested in worthwhile projects to benefit the people of South Africa.

Now SAA is devouring even more cash “to drive the restructured national carrier towards profitability” according to the current rescue plan. I call it an attempt to shrink to success.

“The airline’s transformation into a sustainable business” involves chopping eight international routes to destinations such as Sao Paulo and Hong Kong, and all domestic links except Cape Town.

That doesn’t look like much of a plan to me, because the sky-high costs of SAA’s bloated management will be shouldered by fewer passengers. But it provides further confirmation that the South African government will not allow the airline to fail under any circumstances.

From your point of view, that makes it a racing certainty that the key link between London Heathrow and Johannesburg will continue to operate every night, along with the routes from New York and Frankfurt. (I imagine the services from Perth and Washington DC are next for the chop).

In addition the main southern Africa connecting flights on SAA, often used by British travellers, have survived the latest cull – including Harare, Lilongwe, Maputo and Windhoek.

So I predict your flight will go ahead. But I suggest that next time you need to reach southern Africa you consider the excellent service of Ethiopian Airlines from Heathrow or Manchester via Addis Ababa – a national carrier operating the most modern aircraft profitably.

Email your question to s@hols.tv or tweet @simoncalder