Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-07-Speech-4-019"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-09-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Use of passenger personal data Agreement with the USA on the use of Passenger Name Record data (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060907.4.4-019"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-09-07-Speech-4-0202
lpv:speaker	lp:Stavros Lambrinidis2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 vice-chair; LIBE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transport and illegal detention of prisoners (2006-01-19--2007-02-14)3 substitute; AFCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the issue of the transfer of the personal data of European citizens via the PNR is an issue which, as is only natural, has greatly preoccupied Parliament. Taking account of the seriousness with which the questions of anti-terrorism and fundamental rights must be addressed, can anyone tell us exactly what this informal meeting was of certain ministers of the Member States in London in the middle of the summer, which was even attended by the European Commission, a meeting during which, it would appear, serious new anti-terrorism measures were proposed? With what jurisdiction was it held? Who convened this meeting? Who authorised the eager participants to then issue a press release, 'allegedly' with the new European measures needed? Secondly, as regards the PNR agreement itself, please tell us what it contains, Mr Vice-President, as you expressly promised. Are there any material changes and, more importantly, will the USA's voluntary commitments become binding? You said here, ‘they could become binding’, you did not say, ‘they will become binding’. The United States have given the acute impression over the last few days that they preclude negotiation, that they are threatening not to sign a bilateral agreement and, instead, to conclude even worse bilateral agreements on the PNR with the Member States. In other words, they are blackmailing us. Why do you tolerate this blackmail from a country which admitted a short while ago that it had secret prisons all over the world, in infringement of every concept of international law? Finally, could you please tell us, Mr Vice-President, the story of the European PNR which, it would appear, you discussed in London? What does it mean? Why is it necessary? Why is it proportionate? Will it be an effective measure when the United States, even today, refuses to tell us if use of the PNR with America was necessary or effective? How would it have prevented the British or Danish citizens now being accused of being presumptive bombers? How would it have prevented September 11 or the attacks in London or Madrid? The European Parliament therefore needs information immediately. No one here denies that an anti-terrorist policy and cooperation are needed. But the law is clear: in a democracy, measures must be necessary, effective and proportionate. The national parliaments and the European Parliament must have their say."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph