Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-040"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050607.5.2-040"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I wish to begin by expressing my regret at the French and the Dutch ‘no’ to the Constitution, because the EU will now have to fight terrorism with one hand tied behind its back.
The citizens have given a very clear signal in the debate on the referenda. I would, therefore, call on the Council to work in the spirit of the Constitution, and that means respecting three key principles. The first is democratic control. That means that the Council should not ignore and sideline the European Parliament, but should take its recommendations on board, even if it is not yet obliged to. The other two aspects mentioned by many colleagues are proportionality and effectiveness. Again, in these areas, the Council should think twice about certain measures.
Its own report on the implementation of the action plan to combat terrorism shows that there are considerable gaps in implementation. Before adopting new measures we should be looking at implementation. In the case of the peer review, for example, only ten out of twenty-five countries have so far submitted their implementation reports! How can we take new steps if we do not even know if the old ones work?
I now turn to three specific issues. Firstly, data retention. A lot has already been said and again I would call on the Council to act in the spirit of the Constitution and not ignore the European Parliament. It should also not ignore the signals given by many countries – the example of the United States has already been mentioned. But I would add to those examples the case of the Dutch Parliament, which wanted to adopt a similar data retention measure. However, once it found out how that would work – or, rather, not work – in practice, the Dutch Parliament reconsidered it, because it realised that the data retention proposal was simply not workable. The Council should not ignore this. It is regrettable that the Council is not present on this occasion.
With passenger name records, there have also been several incidents. We were promised an evaluation a year after this entered into force. I should like to know from the Commission when we can expect the evaluation.
Thirdly, we would like to know more about the SitCen, the Situation Centre. What exactly is it doing, what kind of information does it deal with and will it report to the European Parliament?
Finally, I ask the European Parliament to show its colours. We have talked a lot today about the protection of personal data and fundamental rights. I call on this Parliament to adopt not only all the reports on antiterrorism measures but also the Moraes report on anti-discrimination policies and minority rights, because fundamental rights are for all citizens."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples