Hair dye could be placed on banned list thanks to European Union

By David Barrett, Home Affairs Correspondent

7:45PM GMT 21 Nov 2013

Follow

Common household chemicals could be banned from sale to the general public as part of a European Union drive to combat terrorism.

Plans published by the Home Office could prohibit the sale of hydrogen peroxide, which has wide-ranging uses in the home including as a hair dye.

Other common household chemicals used as herbicides could also be banned along with nitromethane, which is used as a fuel in model aeroplanes.

Retailers could also face other restrictions on the sale of chemicals including nail varnish remover and types of drain cleaner.

The Home Office plans respond to EU regulations published in February which aim to restrict the availability of chemicals which terrorists can use to make explosives.

Related Articles

'Make parents who buy alcohol for children pick litter’

21 Nov 2013

'July 7 does not get any easier'

07 Jul 2011

Electrician built and blew up home-made bombs for fun

04 Sep 2012

The Boston bombs show how the internet turned kitchen utensils into weapons of terror

18 Apr 2013

The guidance says: “Home users will be affected. There are legitimate household or hobby uses for some of the chemicals affected by the policy restrictions.

“Homemade explosives have been part of over 70 per cent if UK homeland attacks since the late 1990s.

“They are capable of causing mass harm and significant infrastructure damage.”

The Muslim extremist who attacked London’s transport network on July 7, 2005, used hydrogen peroxide from hair dye to make their explosives which killed 52 innocent people and injured more than 700.

At the inquest into the atrocity, Lady Justice Hallett, the coroner, said it was easier to buy hydrogen peroxide than many ordinary household drugs such as aspirin.

The new consultation set out several options including a ban on sale to the general public of a range of chemicals including hydrogen peroxide, nitric acid and potassium chlorate.

Another option said the public would only be allowed to buy the chemicals if they held a licence or gave the supplier their name and address at the time of purchase.

The cost to businesses - in training staff and complying with the regulations - was estimated to run into millions of pounds a year, not including lose revenue from banned goods.

A consultation on the proposals will run for seven weeks.

 Terrorism in the UKNews »Politics »UK News »Crime »David Barrett »

In politics

View the Original article

A textbook example of European meddling

Comments

Anyone who has travelled through an airport recently will be aware that there are restrictions on the amount of liquid that can be carried in hand luggage. Those restrictions are the legacy of a foiled plot by an al-Qaeda cell to detonate liquid explosives on board at least seven passenger flights bound for North America in 2006. Had the plan not been uncovered by our security services, it could have claimed up to 10,000 lives.

The gang’s leader, Abdulla Ahmed Ali, was convicted on two charges – conspiracy to endanger the safety of an aircraft and conspiracy to murder – and sentenced to life with a minimum term of 40 years. Now he has gone to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to claim that his rights were infringed by media coverage between his 2008 trial and his 2009 retrial, even though the British Court of Appeal has already ruled that he does not have a case. The Strasbourg judges cannot quash his conviction directly, but they could find in his favour and allow Ali and his accomplices to have their convictions quashed in the UK. Putting them behind bars has already cost the UK £100 million, and further legal wrangling would push that bill even higher.

To add insult to injury, the British government has been asked by the European judges to answer a series of questions about Ali’s prosecution to ascertain whether he had a fair trial. This story is an example of why the Europe debate generates so much anger. Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, has told The Sunday Telegraph that Strasbourg should not have the right to undermine the British justice system. He calls Ali’s case “a further example of why things cannot go on as they are”.

Mr Grayling’s interview will give encouragement to those who want to see a serious review of Britain’s relationship both with the EU and with the Strasbourg court. He asserts that the best hope for reform is a Tory victory in 2015. But before then, his party will have to weather next year’s European elections, in which Ukip is predicted to do well. People are tired of excessive EU regulations, interference in our justice system, and the arrogance of so many European institutions. The Conservatives will have to come up with a strong deal for Britain – action rather than mere words – if it is to win public support on this contentious issue.

Related Articles

Our spooks still depend on a cloak of secrecy

04 Nov 2013

Southern Europe is on a precipice

02 Nov 2013

Our relationship with Europe has to change

01 Nov 2013

Is Europe's elite ready to do business with Britain?

01 Nov 2013

Keep your sticky fingers off our jam

31 Oct 2013

Preserving preserves

31 Oct 2013  Telegraph ViewEurope »Comment »EU »Crime »The State of Europe »

In Telegraph View

View the Original article