Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-01-31-Speech-3-124"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070131.20.3-124"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am always very touched when I hear how attached the Council and the Commission are to involving Parliament, because it is indeed true that in the area of counter-terrorism policies, the decision-making is profoundly undemocratic because it totally excludes the European Parliament, and national parliaments are only very partially involved.
Therefore I would have a solution to offer you, and that is not just to make solemn pledges here before the House, but to actually consult Parliament on a voluntary basis on the mandate for negotiations on PNR and SWIFT, because that would not only lend democratic legitimacy to such a mandate: it would also actually strengthen your negotiating position, because frankly, although I have a high appreciation for the officials who do the actual negotiations, I think matters of such importance should have a political mandate.
Secondly, I fully agree with the remarks made by Mrs Roure on the need for global standards on data protection. People who think that we are anti-American are wrong. I have actually seen how attached the Americans are to their privacy laws, which are very good, and how critical they are when the public authorities do not respect the rules on privacy. So I think we should take their critical attitude as an example.
I would like to know if Commission and Council are aware of other categories of data being accessed by the US authorities, not only passenger data and SWIFT data, but also, for example, telecommunications records and insurance company or social security records, and if not by the US authorities, by other countries. If you are not aware of this, maybe you should start investigating.
With regard to PNR, SWIFT and ATS, I will not repeat here all the expectations that we have of the PNR negotiating mandate. That has been said already. But I would like to know why the Commission and the Council did not bother to insist on a second joint evaluation of the implementation of the PNR agreement before agreeing on a new negotiating mandate. Would it not make sense to first evaluate how this one works and how effective it has been before we start talking about the next one?
I would also like to know what the state of play is with regard to the switch from push to pull, which was scheduled for December 2005, then for December 2006. It is now January 2007. Where are we on this point?
I would also like to know what the state of play is with regard to information to passengers. I have been travelling myself lately and I could not get any information on the matter.
I would also like to know on what basis the European Commission will actually be negotiating an agreement on SWIFT.
Finally, with regard to ATS, you get a letter from the Department of Homeland Security saying, ‘Do not worry, we comply with the PNR agreement as we understand it’. I am not a lawyer, but I think that is rather a funny formulation. It does not reassure me and I would like further reassurances about profiling and data-mining. Does it take place? I should like to know about the discrepancy with regard to storage periods and about purpose limitation. What other data are being fed into this and what are the exceptions as regards the privacy act?"@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples