Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-21-Speech-1-145"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-02-21"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Criminal record/Criminal justice2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050221.15.1-145"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-02-21-Speech-1-1462
lpv:speaker	lp:Rainer Wieland2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; LIBE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-12-31)3 member; PETI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 vice-chair; JURI (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is sometimes the case that the Commission, the Council or Parliament – or two of these institutions, or all three of them – are too many steps ahead of the public or a particular group; in such cases we act with too much haste and too much ambition, and are then forced to carry the weary upon our shoulders. The issue we are debating tonight is one for which we all bear responsibility, because what is of vital importance is the results we achieve – or rather, those we do not achieve. Commissioner, it is not merely that we are struggling to keep up with the real nature of crime today, given that for many years now organised crime has no longer been the only kind of crime that crosses borders; we are also struggling to keep up with individual crime. In both cases we are also struggling to give the public what it wants. The public has a right, and indeed the political will, to ensure that twenty-first century crime is not fought with nineteenth century methods. Unfortunately, the impression is sometimes given that information is requested and delivered by telegram, and it therefore needs to flow better. Despite the numerous fears that have been expressed, this would not mean any reduction in the level of data protection; after all, information relating to certain types of specialised crime committed in Kehl is just as important in Offenburg as in Strasbourg. Our priority in exchanging of information of this kind is the public’s right to protection, and not the criminal's right to privacy. Nor is the issue at stake here that of trust between Member States; it is quite simply a matter of whether the public trusts Europe, and the extent to which it trusts us to do a good job of handling this issue. If there is a conclusion to be drawn from all of this, then it is that we are actually asking – as a leading German newspaper has done – whether the public wants a single criminal code, and the answer to that question is ‘yes’. The conclusion that should be drawn from this report is that everyone should state clearly whether they want genuine improvements to be made or not, and that in any case software problems should not be used as a smokescreen."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph