Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-18-Speech-2-266"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031118.9.2-266"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, firstly, very many thanks to my fellow MEP Mr Paasilinna for his excellent, constructive cooperation. In fact, we have not seen otherwise, as this has already occurred with a great many dossiers. I should also like to say to the Italian Presidency that a very peculiar procedure has taken place. I have never before seen the Council ready when Parliament has yet to make a start. We have had to do an enormous amount of work together in order to succeed, and, thanks to the tremendous efforts of the Italian Presidency, we have indeed achieved that compromise. This situation must not be repeated on any account, but we must all learn from it.
The importance of the Agency is clear. The Commissioner has just pointed it out. Mr Paasilinna cited some data, and I shall not reiterate it. I should, however, like to draw attention to the article in last week’s
with the headline: ‘Blackmail by internet as gangs target sites’. What was it about? Ordinary extortion demands are made, then you have to pay a certain amount and you will be left alone. So this is where we have got to. We are talking about damage to industry running into millions.
Very often, physical infrastructure, too, is targeted. We always think that it is financial institutions that are involved, but top of the attacks list are the electricity networks. As an Italian, you know what it means when a light goes out. A huge number of attacks have been committed on the physical infrastructure.
I am very pleased, therefore, that there is now clarity as regards the location of the Agency. It is now ultimately a case of helping the Commission and the Member States with a colossal mobilisation of industry. Fortunately, the Agency has also been given an executive role. It is obvious that industry, too, must play a part as far as possible. When all is said and done, Member States do not have ownership of security. Much has already been said about the Management Board, and also about the voting rights. Privately, I still cannot explain why two-thirds of votes should be needed. We still have not solved this mystery surrounding the Council.
I am extremely pleased that prevention has become one of the tasks. After all, how can you talk about security without mentioning prevention? On the subject of transparency, I should like to ask the Italian Presidency – and I do expect an answer to this – whether you are now prepared to let the Member States that put themselves forward for the Agency do that out in the open, so that everyone knows which country the Agency wants. Will you not let that take place behind closed doors in the Council? I challenge you to provide that transparency.
My conclusion is that this is a first step: no more and no less. In practice, it will turn out to be inadequate and badly in need of revision. It is very important, however, that the Agency is put in place, and therefore my group gives its unqualified support to this Agency and to the amendments."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples