Travellers from UK airports will not be able to avoid full-body scans that show them naked on a screen, even though new European rules promise passengers can opt out, the UK government has said.

Travellers from UK airports will not be granted an alternative to full-body scans, the government has said. Image credit: John Wild
The EU last Wednesday brought in a legislative framework designed to give passengers basic privacy rights, including the right to opt out of a scan. However, UK transport minister Justine Greening told parliament on Monday that UK security concerns mean there will be no alternative, such as a pat-down, for passengers.
"I have considered carefully whether there are alternative screening methods which might deliver equivalent levels of security to a security scan," she said. "A full private search — involving the loosening and/or removal of clothing in the presence of security staff in a private room — would deliver a reasonable level of assurance. However, I believe that this is likely to represent a greater intrusion of privacy than a security scan."
Greening said using alternative methods would lead to "increased costs and longer queues" at airport security. The UK's Aviation Security Act allows the government to maintain the status quo in airport security scanning, she added.
– Department of Transport
The EU can set out minimum standards which all states have to comply with, but individual states are within their rights to impose additional security measures.
Full-body scans, which are in use at Heathrow, Gatwick and Manchester airports, were brought in following a failed attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow a hole in a transatlantic aircraft over Detroit in 2009.
Security scanners should be rolled out more widely at UK airports, Greening said, noting this should be done with "enhanced screening technology with better privacy safeguards".
The UK government can deny the opt-out privacy right by law, according to the Department for Transport.
"The EU can set out minimum standards which all states have to comply with, but individual states are within their rights to impose additional security measures," a spokesman for the department told ZDNet UK. "A regular pat-down search doesn't produce the same level of security as a scanner."
Health concerns
In addition to privacy issues, there are health concerns around the radiation produced by X-ray 'back-scatter' scanners. The European Commission has asked the European Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks to review scientific evidence of the effects of exposing passengers to radiation at airports.
People who decline to undergo the scanning procedure cannot board a plane. "Passengers by and large are accepting of these procedures," the Department for Transport spokesman said, adding that since scanners had been introduced, 12 people have refused to submit to the process. "That's a tiny proportion," he said.
Privacy campaigner Alex Hanff said this does not indicate that the general population accepts the use of body scanners.
"People feel obliged to fly, as money has been spent," Hanff, communications project leader at Privacy International, told ZDNet UK. "To say only 12 people have refused to fly is no indication of the popularity of scanners. If people have paid for tickets, they want to fly."
The Labour government began consultation for an interim code of practice for scanners before the last general election. The consultation finished on 19 July and received over 6,000 responses.
Get the latest technology news and analysis, blogs and reviewsdelivered directly to your inbox with









Talkback
This is absolutely disgusting.
Radiation is RADIATION.
If I do not want to be subjected to radiation I CHOOSE NOT BE.
Justine Greening said herself: "A full private search — involving the loosening and/or removal of clothing in the presence of security staff in a private room — would deliver a reasonable level of assurance. "
BUT THE ONLY REASON WE CANNOT CHOOSE TO OPT OUT IS BECAUSE IT COSTS MORE.
OUR HEALTH IS THE ISSUE HERE
My dentist told me that i don't need to bother having a lead plate on my chest when he x-rayed me. Then he walked away behind a lead screen.
THINK ABOUT THAT
CANCER RATES WILL GO Up 10,000% because of this rubbish
PEOPLE SHOULD BE OUT IN THE STREETS OVER THIS.
Please read about the medical professionals that have said this may cause breast cancer or damage to your DNA
http://www.naturalnews.com/030607_naked_body_scanners_radiation.html
I thought the EU was going to mandate millimetric rather backscatter scanners; they may have issues but they don't have the same radiation worries as the backscatter xray machines. Has the choice of technology changed recently?
MB
Make that 13 people now - I got refused today at Manchester airport.
I thought I was up to date on this legislation - I knew of the EU ruling from the 14th November 2011 so I thought I would be safe to travel. Today on a business trip travelling through manchester to frankfurt, i was requested to go through the body scanner - I refused, and was removed from the security area. The Security staff were nice and friendly about it, but I think I made them think about what they were doing a little more. I found several flaws in the security model. This first gent to greet me even said, how do you think we feel, we work with these things everyday! I said to him, why dont you do something about it then - he answered he cant, and he still needs to earn a living - understandable comment, but doesn't change the facts of the farce that is this security system - see my comments below.
Did you know that:
1) You only go through the Full body scanners (FBS) ONLY if you set of the metal detectors?!
How does this make any sense - the primary reason for using the FBS is to detect items other that metal which can not be detected from metal detectors - isn't this self defeatist that if you want to smuggle something like liquids or explosives, just ensure you dont go off in the metal detector and you will never be discovered! No logic there at all.
2) As it was obviously something metal that made me set off the metal detector I requested if i could go back through the metal detector after removing my glasses and wedding ring (these are the only two items I had left on me after stripping everything else off!) They said not - once past that point you can not have another go and you must go through the FBS. This is against my views, and if I can then prove I can not set of the metal detector by removing all metallic objects, I do not see any reason for not being able to try again and save everbody work and hassle.
By the inability of the security staff to allow me to go back through the metal detector, and my insistance I was not going through the FBS, a lot more work was had, requiring the security manager, the deputy airport manager, two police officers, and the offloading of my baggage from the aircraft, and the cancellation of my ticket - how much work just because of their pig headidness for not letting me retry the metal detector route. Unbelievable.
I also gleamed that if I buy a ticket on a different Itenerary in a different terminal, then I could try to travel again, but I could not attempt to go through the same terminal again as the security staff now know my face and I would be in more hot water for trying. OK, so what they are saying is that the security in the 3 terminals is not linked! I could go and purchase another ticket in another terminal and ensure I get through security by removing everything metal as then i wouldnt get the FBS. How clever is that? NOT.
If I was so bothered about trying to get something on a plane, wouldnt I just simply choose a different airport that doesn't use this ridiculous FBS technology.
Lastly, I was still not searched and the police are there purely for upholding the peace should I have kicked off. So, if I was concealing something, I would still have it after being escorted back out of the building. Eh?!
From a completely bamboosled unfrequent and now a less likely flyer.
Jason Bullough
Heathrow uses the ProVision millimetric wave scanners, about which there are few if any health concerns. Manchester has the far more concerning RapiScan backscatter X-ray scanners, which I understood the EU was not backing. (Heathrow also has no alternative to the body scanner, but millimetric wave has neither the medical nor privacy issues - scans of you look rather like a ghost!)
MB