BAA and the Government are at odds over plans to fingerprint passengers at Heathrow’s new fifth terminal. The Home Office denies having told the Spanish-owned airport operator to use fingerprinting as an extra security measure and the privacy watchdog says that the plan may be illegal.

The Information Commissioner’s Office is concerned that taking four fingerprints and a photograph of passengers is another step “on the road to a surveillance society” and has warned the airport operator that it might breach Data Protection laws.

BAA said that it was in negotiations with the commissioner over the fingerprint plan but that there was no prospect of the row delaying the scheduled operational opening of the £4.3 billion terminal on Thursday.

A spokesman for the Information Commissioner said: “Our concern is with the surveillance society. Is this another step on the road towards that kind of society? Why do they need fingerprints, and why four? Why are other airports able to operate with just photographs, and is this a proportionate response?”

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has raised concerns over why BAA wants to use fingerprinting at Heathrow when other airports such as Gatwick and Manchester rely on photographs at departure lounges used by international and domestic passengers.

He said that when passengers were asked for fingerprints they should demand to know why they were being taken, what would be done with them and how long would they be kept.

The fingerprint plan will affect all domestic passengers using Terminal 5 as well as international travellers who are transferring to an internal flight. It will enable domestic and international passengers to mingle in the shops, restaurants, cafés and bars of the terminal’s departure lounge.

Fingerprints will be taken when passengers go through security, and they will be checked at the gate to ensure that the individual boarding the plane is the same person who first checked in. Without such security an incoming international passenger would be able to fly elsewhere in Britain without being checked by immigration.

A BAA spokesman said that the Home Office wanted more security because there was a higher risk at Heathrow. “When BAA announced plans for common departure lounges, the Border and Immigration Agency \ were keen on a reliable biometric element to the border control. After a search of available technologies, fingerprinting was selected as the most robust method by BAA, the BIA and other government departments.”

The spokesman added: “We are confident that there is no breach of the Data Protection Act and nor do these measures affect the fundamental rights of our passengers, principally because we encrypt all data immediately and destroy it within 24 hours.”

In a statement the Home Office said that the issue of which extra security measures to implement was a matter for the British Airports Authority, as it had been the authority’s decision to have a common departure lounge.

“We requested that they take measures to ensure the integrity of the UK border. We are content that the measures they have taken ensure the security of the UK border. The design of the system is a matter for BAA.”

The Conservatives blamed the Government yesterday for airport queues over the Easter holiday. They said that queueing had been worse because of a failure to recruit enough immigration officers to keep up with the growing number of passengers.

Damian Green, the Tory immigration spokesman, said that passenger traffic at Heathrow and Gatwick had increased by 12.5 per cent since 2001, compared with a 5.9 per cent increase in the number of immigration officers.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure