17 Amendments of Chris DAVIES related to 2010/2154(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Acknowledges that Member States have the legal right to insist upon the use of body scanners where they believe that this will enhance security over and above the requirements of EU legislation, or for trial purposes, and trusts that the trials now underway in Finland, France, the Netherlands, Italy and the UK will contribute information that will assist the Commission to develop Europe-wide best practice standards for regulation and codes of practice that will ensure the protection of protect personal data and safeguard human health;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that Member States and airport administrations are making growing use of body scanners in the belief that they can increase the ability of security staff to detect prohibited items, such as liquid or plastic explosive, that cannot be identified by existing metal detectors, as well as eliminating the need for passengers to undergo the discomfort and indignity of body searches;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Takes regard of the Commission’s Communication of 15 June 2010 on the Use of Security Scanners at EU airports, COM(2010)311 final, and the conclusions and recommendations therein;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that a range of body scanners using different technologies are already in operation, believes that each must be assessed on its own merits, and supports the view of the European Commission expressed in its recent Communication that a common level of protection for European citizens could be ensured by way of technical standards and operational conditions that would have to be laid down in EU legislation;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Takes regard of the security concern that universal use of a single technology for threat detection would render body scanners more vulnerable to circumvention, and the recommendation that security risks will be reduced through the use of a variety of technologies and screening systems;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Acknowledges that concerns exist about exposure to ionising radiation, but recognises that humans are exposed to background radiation at all times, and that travellers by air at high altitudes routinely experience particular exposure to ultra violet radiation and cosmic rays; notes the Commission’s assessment that the use of X-ray backscatter body scanners exposes travellers to no more than the equivalent of 2% of the natural radiation which they would typically experience each day, or the equivalent to a few minutes travel on a long haul flight;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that the scientific consensus appears to suggest that the use of body scanners presents no risk comparable to that realised by the daily exposure of humans to natural conditions, but is concerned that this assumes that equipment will always function correctly and believes that measures must be taken to ensure that this is in fact the case;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Encourages any individual or body who can provide evidence that contradicts the current scientific consensus, that exposure to radiation from body scanners currently in use presents no health risks even for young children and pregnant women, to submit evidence to this effect for scientific peer review;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Accepts that, notwithstanding the scientific consensus that body scanners present no health risk, European Commission proposals to promote EU harmonisation with respect to their use should take into account potential uncertainties as well as the risk that equipment may sometimes be faulty, and should also address the concerns of individuals with particular fears by providing for Member States to require airport administrations to make special arrangements, when requested, for those who may regard themselves as vulnerable, including pregnant women, babies, children, people with disabilities, and people with implanted medical devices such as pacemakers or defibrillators;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Expects the Commission to ensure that any draft legislation on this matter will lay down requirements for Member States to ensure that body scanners have been properly installed, are properly operated, and are subjected to monitoring and scrutiny to ensure that they are functioning correctly at all times;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 (new)
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 (new)
Calls on the Commission to propose without delay a legal framework on the use of body scanners at EU airports that will pay full respect to fundamental rights and address the issue of health concerns;