Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-29-Speech-1-071"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Protection of personal data of air passengers2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040329.7.1-071"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-29-Speech-1-0722
lpv:speaker	lp:Carlos Coelho2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2003-03-10--2004-04-30)3 unknown; Partido Social Democrata (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, there can be no doubt about the need for us to combat the growing menace of international crime and, most importantly, of terrorism. There can also be no doubt that close cooperation is required, both at Community and at transatlantic level. What concerns me, however, is that we might be undermining the healthy balance between security and justice by promoting a comprehensive system of vigilance over every single passenger, every single citizen, thereby violating the principle of proportionality, which, in any democratic society, must always be complied with. Commissioner Bolkestein asks us what message we wish to send out to our partners. What we must send out is a clear message that we wish to cooperate on our common objectives whilst complying with our laws. Indeed, we received a most welcome contribution from the Article 29 Group, containing the nineteen essential items of information that strike me as sufficient to protect passenger security. We would also like assurances as regards the retention of this information, a right of appeal and the manner in which it is to be used. Commissioner, what kind of message did we send to the citizens, in March 2003, when Parliament deemed the transfer of passenger name records (PNR) unacceptable, in case guarantees were not provided for adequate levels of protection and of compliance with the Community rules in force? Or in October 2003, when we saw that the Commission’s own conclusions indicated that the protection offered was considered inadequate? Commissioner, you have heard speeches on the dilemma that you have posed Parliament in a vote on this proposal for a resolution. Let me ask you a different question, in order to get to the crux of the debate: what has changed since March or October 2003 to justify Parliament’s change of attitude?"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph