Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-01-13-Speech-2-215"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-01-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090113.25.2-215"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-01-13-Speech-2-2162
lpv:speaker	lp:Stavros Lambrinidis2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; LIBE (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2007-11-16--2009-07-13)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the fact that Parliament’s view prevailed today over the Council’s attempts to introduce biometric data records for six-year-old children is a victory for the fundamental principle that personal data can only be collected if it can be proven that it is necessary, proportionate and of course useful to do so, a principle which I fear the Council and the Commission have frequently ignored over recent years in their legislative initiatives. In the case of children’s passports and fingerprints, obviously children need their own passports with biometric identifiers in an effort to prevent abductions, child pornography and trafficking in children. At the same time, however, it is obviously illegal to collect such identifiers if they are not necessary. As far as fingerprints are concerned, we have studies which show that they are barely of any use for six-year-old children. Their fingerprints change so quickly that passports and recognition from them are useless. So today Parliament has achieved a balance. It is demanding a serious study from the Commission in order to see when in fact children can be protected using their fingerprints, and will only allow them to be collected at ages at which we know for certain that this is the case. Finally, in any case, as far as biometric identifiers in passports are concerned, we have said ‘yes’ for the purpose of recognising the holder, ‘yes’ for identifying the holder, ‘yes’ for ascertaining that the passport has not been forged, but ‘no’ to the creation of electronic data files on millions of innocent citizens."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph