Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-07-06-Speech-2-070"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-07-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Agreement between the EU and the USA on the processing and transfer of financial messaging data from the EU to the USA for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100706.5.2-070"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-07-06-Speech-2-0712
lpv:speaker	lp:Rui Tavares2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2011-06-23)3 unknown; Bloco de Esquerda (Independente) (2009-07-14--2011-06-29)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Mercosur countries (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2009-09-16--2011-06-23)3 substitute; CULT (2009-07-16--2011-06-23)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, what are we talking about? We are talking about almost 90 million financial messages per month, a figure that equates to more than one billion financial messages per year. These financial messages originate from Europe, either between European countries or between Europe and the rest of the world. For months and years, this is what we have referred to in this Parliament as bulk data, the block transfer of data. Parliament considered refusing the transfer of bulk data, for the first time, in February, when it rejected the agreement. It did this for a second time in May, with a resolution in which it clearly stated that the transfer of bulk data is illegal. Now the transfer of bulk data is here. This is the substance of the agreement; the substance of the agreement does not change, and everybody in this House knows that very well. Therefore, there are good reasons for continuing to vote against it. This agreement has many weak points. When they tell us that it gives the right to judicial review, to transparency ... my dear ladies and gentlemen, we know all too well that this is an executive agreement with the White House. The American law is not changing; it is not passing through Congress. European citizens residing in the United States of America are discriminated against because of such an agreement. The many beautiful words in the agreement do not have any kind of basis in practice, and well we know it. Yet, they then present us with the crucial issue concerning the role of Europol. It must, however, be stated clearly that Europol is not charged with the protection of data. We have a European Data Protection Supervisor which the European Commission and the European Council never wanted to include in this agreement. Europol is an agency which must be controlled because it benefits from this agreement. It receives police clues, but it is not a filtering agency which serves to protect the data of European citizens. We know that this is wrong; we know that it is both illegal and unconstitutional. Yet only yesterday, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs did Parliament a disservice by refusing to ask the opinion of Parliament’s Legal Service on Europol’s role here, which we know is very wrong. The Left Group will ask the Legal Service for that opinion – and I would like to thank our fellow Member, Mr Alvaro, who has worked hard and has been transparent in his work, cooperating with rapporteurs from each group – because, my dear friends, we can choose whether we want to know or not. We are charged with the task, as legislators, of foreseeing the legal implications of this agreement, and the Left Group will vote resolutely against this agreement."@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