Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-02-Speech-4-089"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041202.8.4-089"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The proposal before us from the Commission and the Council is a consequence and an integral part of the EU institutions’ current drift towards securitarianism. We therefore voted against it, and indeed this is a position that Parliament had already adopted in the previous legislature.
This measure forms part of a supranational dynamic to create vigilance and control tools at EU level, such as an EU-level personal database, and has been widely criticised for being disproportionate and for having a dubious legal basis, all the more so given that there is no legal framework for protecting the general public, nor is there any parliamentary scrutiny, particularly on the part of the national parliaments.
Furthermore, this measure slavishly seeks to satisfy US demands as regards the entry of EU citizens, although this does not apply reciprocally.
On the initiative of the ‘G5’ countries (United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy and Spain), the Council intends to go even further than the ‘demands’ on the use of biometric data – the effectiveness of which is certainly open to question, given the arguments put forward for its introduction, the so-called ‘war on terror’ – by introducing two (photograph and fingerprints) rather than one.
Hence our vote against."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples