Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-23-Speech-1-091"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061023.16.1-091"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, let me take this opportunity to thank Mr Coelho for his outstanding performance on this file. It is, after all, thanks to him and his negotiating skills that the decision-making procedure on this important and complex package of legislation has been finished in time. Mr Coelho was confronted with some tough choices during this process. Producing law at record speed is efficient, but it cannot be denied that this efficiency comes at the expense of transparency.
My group is worried about the lack of data protection concerning the second generation of the Schengen Information System. The Council finally agreed to refer to the framework decision on data protection in the third pillar. A referral like that is the least we can do to protect our citizens’ rights and we are not there yet – far from it. The Council initially refused the referral because the decision had not yet been taken. That is true, but why? Is it not the Council that is putting the brakes on this issue? And is it not the Council that is aiming to water down the decision, almost to the point that there is hardly anything left to protect?
I cannot help but mention here the German Government’s offer to make data protection in the third pillar a priority during its Presidency, provided we agree to make some fundamental changes at the last minute
. Well, that leaves a bitter taste indeed, after the British Government promised to deliver if Parliament agreed with data retention and did not; after both the Austrian and Finnish Presidencies did not seem too keen on pushing the issue forward, but are nevertheless watering down the proposal. Yes, German Government, you will have to make this one of your priorities, but not in exchange for a favour. You will have to do it because citizens deserve it and they deserve it now. The lack of data protection makes it all the more worrisome that the Parliament is asked to give up its decision-making rights concerning biometrics. Again, this is all in the spirit of efficiency, but at the expense of transparency, and therefore democracy.
So why am I proposing to vote in favour, in spite of all this criticism? For many reasons. I will mention just a few. The citizens of Europe do not appear to be particularly worried about co- or framework decisions; they are, however, worried about the increasing number of stolen cars finding their way to eastern European Member States and would like us to take the necessary steps to fight that growing area of crime. In an area without internal borders, we also need to have a joint approach to illegal immigration. No matter how difficult this issue is for many of us, we need a common tool to deal with the presence of illegal immigrants. Also, the Schengen Information System will add more meaning and substance to the European arrest warrant and strengthen the role of Europol and Eurojust with the increasing cooperation of our police and security forces."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples