Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-31-Speech-3-253"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040331.10.3-253"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this House should not withhold its support for the report by the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, which rejects the outgoing Spanish Government's initiative. After all, we have already adopted two important decisions at 12 noon today. This House – with good reason – has already clearly rejected any communication of passenger data to the US border protection and security authorities, and, thank God, it has today also rejected collective expulsion through joint European flights.
Why, may I ask, should a measure raising so many concerns about data protection suddenly become quite unproblematical as soon as it 'only' affects the European Union? Or are all methods now supposed to be acceptable in combating 'illegal' immigration? Do fundamental rights not count any more?
The fundamental right to decide for oneself what is done with one’s personal data is a valuable asset, one with which we must not deal lightly. It is derived very clearly not only from the Member States' national constitutions but also from Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Community's Data Protection Directive sets high standards for the communication of personal data. The Spanish initiative, on the other hand, makes combating illegal immigration through stringent surveillance methods the primary goal – and it is unfortunate that the rapporteur supports this. Yet, as all experience has shown – and this must be made very clear – illegal immigration is tackled not through police repression but solely by establishing peaceful conditions worthy of human dignity in other parts of Europe and the world.
The intention to allow airline companies to collect and communicate passenger data is extremely problematical for a variety of reasons. Private companies would thus be granted sovereign rights which, until now, have been reserved solely for government agencies in the Member States – for example, in the event of imminent danger or other cases which must be specifically justified. I do not think we should have a situation in Europe in which the movements of millions of people are being spied on. What happens if the data are misused? Let us not even think about that.
The claim that this measure is designed to combat illegal immigration also lacks any credibility. I think it is patently absurd to assume that the poorest of the poor who come to Europe generally take the plane – the most expensive route. The reality is very different: the large numbers of people who drown as they attempt to cross the Mediterranean or border rivers – and this happens every day – tell a very different story.
I think it is important to call a halt at last to the authorities' data-collecting zeal, which is spiralling out of control. We should not be embarking on a course which, in the USA, is rightly criticised by all civil liberties organisations. Europe does not need uninterrupted surveillance of its passengers and borders. What Europe needs is genuine protection for the basic rights of every individual who resides here."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples