Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-05-Speech-2-781-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110705.42.2-781-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, it is an honour to defend this own-initiative report. While it was initially intended that it would be limited to security scanners, the recent increase in terrorist activity demanded that the report go further.
With regard to liquids: I am not going to refer to them as there will be a debate with the Commissioner, and two objectives have already been set: there is the unfulfilled objective of 29 April 2011, on which we are awaiting reports, and the guarantee that this will be met in 2013. The European Civil Aviation Conference guarantees that technology exists which is capable of detecting liquid explosives. Therefore, this report reaffirms that Parliament’s mandate must be implemented if everything is ready. It is clear that the first objective has not been met and, therefore, as I have already said and I repeat, we are awaiting the Commissioner’s comments.
In the area of cargo and mail: the recent attacks carried out on passenger planes have led the European Union to develop a more ambitious plan and to act quickly to identify additional necessary measures. I support the idea that security and screening systems have to be proportional and equivalent. Goods transported on planes must be screened, particularly if 70% of cargo is transported on passenger planes. In this regard, I welcome the support of all the groups for raising the level of cargo security, as I proposed.
To conclude, Mr President, all of the issues which are included in this report on aviation security are a response to previous terrorist acts, which is why, over the coming years, the European Union will endeavour to establish a security system that prevents and avoids future attacks.
I particularly wish to thank all those who worked together to enable a very difficult and complex issue, which was initially rejected by Parliament, to reach this plenary session today – thanks to the Commission’s new attitude and the flexibility shown by the political groups – with widespread support and broad consensus.
I would also like to thank the Commissioner for his cooperation and dialogue. The Commission called on Parliament, and the Commission will take up the relay. The next steps are the Commission’s responsibility. We await the Commissioner’s comments.
As a result, the Committee on Transport and Tourism unanimously agreed to make me the rapporteur so as to ensure that the report would take an integral view of civil aviation security. In keeping with that mandate, the report assesses security scanners, the decisions adopted regarding liquids, aerosols and gels, and security measures on cargo and mail. Transport security, ladies and gentlemen, is one of the main concerns in the fight against terrorism. Currently, Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 describes the different aspects which are included in the points of this report.
In the area of security scanners: as is set out in the explanatory statement, this report derives from the Commission’s 2008 draft regulation. This proposal, if you recall, was rejected by Parliament for not demonstrating that it fulfilled a series of requirements such as respect for fundamental rights, safeguarding health and protecting passenger data. Therefore, the Commission has resolved, and I hope it will continue to do so, all the doubts that Parliament raised and which I have identified and dealt with in this report.
With regard to the protection of fundamental rights, the new-generation security scanners comply with all the necessary requirements: human dignity, respect for privacy, non-discrimination and the guarantee of a high level of protection of human health in the definition and exercise of all European Union policies and actions, all of which are included in the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The systems in place are not usually those presented in the news or newspapers by critics of security scanners. The proposed systems do not show the human body, but rather a stick figure, a mannequin, a photograph of the fully-clothed passenger or simply an ‘OK’ in green when the passenger passes through without activating the alarm.
In the area of data protection: data protection is an issue that is also under constant review, and is guaranteed by new scanner technology. This makes it possible for data to be automatically destroyed once the purpose for which it is collected has been achieved.
With regard to body images, ladies and gentlemen: no body images will be produced. This is one of the basic points on which the vast majority agreed, without doubt because it affects privacy as a fundamental right that cannot be eroded.
In the area of public health protection: the maximum guarantee has been given by Parliament. Ionising radiation, because of its harmful effects, whether through cumulative or long-term effects, has been made obsolete by another type of technology that does not affect passenger health. Therefore, Parliament is sending a clear message and saying ‘no’ to the use of X-rays.
To summarise, ladies and gentlemen, security scanners are not perfect but they are, without doubt, more effective than simple metal detectors. They bring added value and can detect dangerous objects and items that conventional scanners cannot detect. They are a tool providing measures that are proportional to the risk they are trying to prevent. They will be optional and not compulsory for Member States, but those States that do introduce them should implement harmonised, minimum standards for everyone. They will not be compulsory for travellers, but those who refuse to use them will be obliged to submit to alternative procedures which are at least as effective as the security scanners."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples