There have been at least 10 terror attacks in London in the past decade, but the authorities here have not told anyone it’s unsafe to visit.

But in the case of UK citizens travelling abroad, the Foreign Office advice that is typically issued following attacks is often criticised for being over-cautious and, in particular, over-extended.

It must baffle some nations when the FCDO continues to caution citizens against travel to foreign lands long after – years, sometimes – an incident has taken place and other nations have returned.

While it does not technically ban travel, the FCDO’s advisories “against all but essential travel” invalidate normal travel insurance. As a result, operators tend to err on the side of caution and pull their flights and programmes.

There is some irritation in the travel industry about how the FCDO operates. A recent open letter to the government from 35 signatories on behalf of Sri Lanka labels its advice “overly harsh”. Campaigners say the FCDO’s stance is “systematically undermining the travel industry” in Sri Lanka and are calling for a “more consistent” approach.

They perhaps have a point; it is nearly five years since the April 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, but the FCDO still details them prominently in its advice, adding in bold: “Terrorists are likely to try and carry out attacks in Sri Lanka.”

’No justification’

While the horror of that atrocity, which claimed more than 250 lives, shouldn’t be diminished, many think it time to move on. Sam Clark, co-founder and managing director of Sri Lanka specialist Experience Travel Group, says: “It’s clear the FCDO advice is no longer fit for purpose.”

Clark is calling for the FCDO to use more context, and accuses it of “retaining outdated travel advice” that deters British tourists and directs income away from the country’s tourism industry.

Another gripe is the references to 2022’s political demonstrations and potential food and medicine shortages. “There have been no protests for at least 18 months and no food shortages for a long time – I can think of no possible justification,” Clark reasons.

In contrast is the March 2019 mass shooting in New Zealand, in which 51 people were killed in an anti-Islamic attack in Christchurch. Then, the FCDO merely advised visitors “to remain vigilant”.

Now, both destinations carry a standard FCDO warning, which reads: “There is a high threat of terrorist attack globally affecting UK interests and British nationals, including from individuals and groups who view the UK and British nationals as targets.”

However, in New Zealand’s case, no mention is made of the 2019 attack – or any potential risk to British Muslims – and the advice simply states: “Terrorist attacks in New Zealand cannot be ruled out.”

Sales affected

There is also concern about how long it takes for the FCDO to update its advice, as some destinations know to their cost. Direct flights to Sharm El Sheikh were halted by the UK government after a Russian airliner was bombed in October 2015, killing 224 people. Germany lifted its ban the following year, but it took until October 2019 before UK flights were given the go-ahead.

Only then, after the Department for Transport was satisfied with security procedures at the Red Sea resort’s airport, was it deemed safe, despite other nations being cleared to go years earlier; indeed, the first Tui flights did not land in Sharm until February 2020.

Morocco’s FCDO page is another that could be deemed in need of an update, or at least rephrasing. It reminds readers of how two Scandinavian tourists were murdered while hiking near Mount Toubkal, an incident that took place six years ago.

Elsewhere, change has been more swift. Tunisia suffered a terrorist attack in the resort of Sousse in June 2015 that left 38 dead, including 30 Britons. The FCDO was understandably cautious, but in July 2017, the advice was amended, albeit long after France – Tunisia’s biggest European source market – went back.