11 Amendments of Silvia-Adriana ȚICĂU related to 2010/2154(INI)
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas training for security staff is a crucial element that is necessary in order to guarantee a high level of aviation security, which must be compatible with a way of treating passengers that preserves their dignity as individuals and protects their personal data,
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission, only after carrying out an impact survey to show that the devices do not constitute a risk to passenger health, personal data, the individual dignity and privacy of passengers or effectiveness, to propose adding security scanners to the list of authorised screening methods, together with appropriate rules for their use, as set out in this resolution;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the use of security scanners must be based on common rules, procedures and standards that not only lay down detection performance but also impose the necessary safeguards to protect the health and fundamental rights of passengers and workers;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Proposes, mbefore specificallyadding security scanners to the list of authorised security checks, that the Commission should revise the rules on the use of security scanners to ensure that the provisions on the protection of health and fundamental rights are adapted to technological progress;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes the view that, even though 100% aviation security cannot be guaranteed, the detection performance of security scanners is higher than that offered by current metal detectors, particularly with regard to non- metallic objects and liquids, whilst frisking (full hand-search) causes more irritation and is more likely to be rejected than a scanner;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes the view that the use of security scanners does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective of a high level of security, provided that the appropriate safeguards are guaranteed and taking into account that less demanding methods would not provide a similar degree of protectionsafety;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Takes the view that exposure to doses of ionising radiation above the recommended annual limits cannot be acceptable; believes, therefore, that X-ray transmission imaging should not be used in systematic security screening;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Believes that such protection can be betteronly be achieved whenif a standard figure is used, and that the use of body images should be not be permitted only with the appropriate guarantees and on an exceptional basis;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Stresses that images should not be stored for longer than is necessary to ensure aviation security, that they should be destroyed automatically and irreversibly once they are no longer necessary for the intended purposes, and that they should not be used for purposes other than to detect prohibited objects;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Takes the view that the operating rules must ensure that passengers are given comprehensive and accurate information, are offered alternative security checks and give their explicit agreement and that people are not selected to pass through a security scanner on the basis of discriminatory criteria;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to proposand Member States to ensure that special training that takes into account the impact on personal dignity, health and the protection of personal data be provided for security staff responsible for using security scanners;