Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-174"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030312.5.3-174"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the right to privacy is not sacrosanct, it is a basic right but it can be violated if there are important issues at stake, if it is effective, if it is proportional and if there are guarantees against misuse. I can tell the Commission now that as far as I am concerned blackmail by a third country or long waiting times for air travel do not count as important issues. This will really have to be solved another way.
Privacy is not an obstacle, but an essential part of security. Dealing carelessly with the privacy of our citizens jeopardises the basic trust of the people in their government and in the constitutional state and then we are worse off. For my group it is logical that the United States wants to know who is setting foot on its territory and in this context we can of course talk about the exchange of data. But then agreements must also be made about what data we exchange, which authorities have access to them and how long they may be retained.
US Customs may pass the data on to other authorities that are concerned with combating terrorism. The interest on the American side in the personal data of aircraft passengers cannot, however, be seen separately from their efforts to bring about a Global Computer Surveillance System. The United States, as my colleague Mr Alavanos has just said, wants to track the travel patterns of citizens, their credit card purchases, and so on, worldwide.
Now the Commission is really pleased because the Americans have made a solemn undertaking not to use data about religion and health. What does that mean? Does it mean that while they do have access to these data, they have simply undertaken not to do anything with them? Do you really believe, Commissioner, that if the American authorities have these data and if they think that it is useful for their system, they are really not going to use them? Even meal preferences can say something about a person. I myself have been vegetarian for years and years, even on aircraft. Now, all of this is going to be recorded and analysed. For people who do not like this, a European Commission spokesman had good advice. ‘The choice is clear,’ he said, ‘either you do not go to the United States, or you go for the sandwich option.’ Do you, Commissioner, endorse this advice, and do you also think it so enormously funny?
In itself it fits in well with your liberal remark of a few moments ago that passengers must in particular be well informed about sensitive information that is gathered about them. Now the small print on an aircraft ticket is one thing, but do passengers really have any other option? I would like to hear what you have to say on that as well.
Mr President, I would otherwise like to associate myself with the many comments of my fellow Members about the precise technical and legal problems with this. We for our part say that the exchange of data must stop immediately. European rules apply here on the European continent and if we are going to make agreements about changing these rules, then the partner with whom we are making these agreements must also respect our rules, our basic principles. This is how it works in a partnership between well-meaning countries."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples