Why is the Foreign Office still advising against all non-essential travel to Bali, even though it's been 17 months since the al-Qaeda nightclub bombings? And why aren't we being advised to avoid going to Madrid, or New York?

Good question. Governments in the West seem to respond very differently when terrorism occurs in the developing world. Days after 9/11, for example, where there were many times the number of fatalities than there were in Bali, Mayor Rudy Giuliani appealed on TV for visitors to flock to New York in defiance of the terrorists, and the Foreign Office offered no advice telling Brits to stay away. Similarly, after Madrid, the FO website simply advised visitors to be vigilant. Yet, 18 months on, Bali remains a no-go area, visitor numbers have been wrecked and income from tourism - which accounts for 60 per cent of Bali's GDP - is down 70 per cent on pre-October 2002 figures.

An FO spokesman said intelligence indicated that a serious threat to British targets throughout Indonesia remains in force, although there is no specific threat relating to Bali. Tourism Concern, which hosted a debate on the future of tourism in Bali in October 2003 with the FO present, said it had failed to discover why the stay-away advice remains.

'No clear answers were given at the meeting,' said Kelly Haynes, Tourism Concern's campaign manager. 'The impact on Bali has been horrendous. The advice the Foreign Office issues has tremendous influence and yet it is inconsistent and unfair.'

So what are the Australians and Americans advising their citizens regarding travel to Bali and, for that matter, Madrid?

Exactly the same as the UK. Avoid Bali at all costs. Travel to Madrid, but exercise caution. So at least there is consistency in the inconsistency.

With the daily warnings issued in the UK about an imminent threat of attack, isn't London just about as dangerous as anywhere?

Another good question. And although it would be wise not to be complacent about the whole terrorism issue, we do have to face the fact that these days we live in a less safe world generally. 'I'd go to Bali without hesitation,' said Sue Ockwell, spokeswoman for Association of Independent Tour Operators. 'We're expecting ghastly things in the UK, but they wouldn't tell people not to come here, would they? I cannot understand why Bali is on the banned list. Travel is such a rich part of life, and it's never been cheaper.'

So, despite the FO advice, I still want to go to Bali. What insurance problems am I likely to face?

Most travel insurance policies will not cover the policyholder against acts of war or terrorism, irrespective of the destination. However, since the rise in the global terror threat, some insurance companies see travel to countries listed as dangerous by the FO as being in breach of 'taking reasonable care at all times', therefore invalidating the entire policy, even for routine claims. Malcolm Tarling, of the Association of British Insurers, says that other companies will honour claims for losses not relating to war or terrorism, even if you're in a FO banned country. Check with your insurer.

Are tour operators still selling packages to Bali?

Most large tour operators follow the FO's travel advisories strictly and have not sold Bali since the bombings. Although no longer in its brochures, Kuoni (01306 740500) is selling Bali on request, but travellers have to organise their own insurance and sign waivers acknowledging the potential dangers they're exposing themselves to. Handmade Holidays (01285 642555) has seven nights at the five-star Oberoi Bali from £1,090 per person on a room-only basis, including flights. Like Kuoni, Handmade makes clients sign a waiver, but it can offer insurance.