Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-09-Speech-3-317"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050309.19.3-317"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am grateful to Commissioner Frattini for having already announced that the Commission will propose its own initiative. I have a number of questions regarding the retention of data in telecommunications networks, to which I hope your proposal will be able to provide answers.
My first question relates to costs, as long-term data retention is a major financial burden, in particular for small telecommunications firms. The proposal put forward by the Council and the four Member States makes no provision for compensation. Who is meant to pay for these measures, and what is their cost-benefit ratio? It is quite clear that longer retention periods will not mean increased security for citizens.
Data protection experts, and even law enforcement agencies such as the Federal Criminal Police Office in Germany, have expressed doubt as to whether there is any need for the measures outlined in the Council decision. The
has even stated its opposition to the minimum period for retention of traffic data, and it is calling on the Federal Government to withdraw its support for the proposal. How can we expect to achieve greater security if terrorists and those involved in organised crime still have alternatives open to them that are not covered at all in this proposal? What measures will be taken to deal with Internet cafés, flat rate lines, public telephone boxes and calls using telephone providers based abroad, and who will be in a position to monitor and retain all this data? Data protection is another extremely important issue as regards the transfer of data to third parties.
It is also quite clear that what we need is effective security, and more of it. No one is opposed to fighting international terrorism or organised crime, but we have absolutely no need for unnecessary monitoring.
I hope that you will provide answers to all these questions in your proposal. It is quite obvious, and we firmly believe it to be true, that although it is good that checks should be carried out, it is even better if people have confidence in them. As it stands, the proposal by the four Member States will not foster confidence among the public."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples