Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-20-Speech-1-131"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081020.15.1-131"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I would like to react to what Mr Bradbourn had to say. I too am not against passenger name records (PNR) per se, even though that impression is being conveyed to some extent. What matters is, and in that respect I totally agree with the rapporteur, that you have to look very carefully at how this instrument can be best used and when usefulness and need are really defined.
I would in this context like to make another proposal to the Commission. Commissioner Barrot stated that he would very much like to work with the European Parliament, and I appreciate this, but when it comes to usefulness and need, then we still have some loose ends to tie up, and these, I believe, are at the very centre of the debate between the Commission, Council and Parliament on this topic.
Commissioner, you say that you have a whole ream of assessments that demonstrate a high level of usefulness. To my knowledge, based on what I have read on the subject, it mainly provides information about migration, and it solves a number of issues, but, as far as I am aware, it has not really done anything to benefit the fight against terror. I am quite happy, though, to look into this with you at some stage.
I would therefore suggest that an inquiry be carried out and that you and we sit down to determine the research question, that we have an enquiry carried out and that we then discuss this at length. We have nothing against PNRs in principle, but we do want the records to be handled with care, in line with the principles of our privacy policy. I hope that you are willing to back this up. Could you respond to this?
As for your agreement with Australia, it may well be a cut above other agreements, for example with the United States, but my question is: which other agreements are still in the pipeline? You said a moment ago that, whatever happens, none of this should fall into the hands of repressive authorities. I can, in this light, assume that we will never negotiate with Russia or China. Could you in any event confirm this, and maybe provide us with a list of the countries with which negotiations are already underway, of which we will not learn until a few months down the line?"@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples