Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-04-19-Speech-4-060-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-04-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EU-USA agreement on the use and transfer of PNR to the US Department of Homeland Security (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"hu"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120419.4.4-060-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-04-19-Speech-4-061-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Kinga Göncz2
lpv:spokenAs	member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; LIBE (2012-01-23--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Magyar Szocialista Párt (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; EMPL (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; PETI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the European Parliament has the right of consent in respect of the agreement on the use and transfer of Passenger Name Records. This was the case with the SWIFT agreement as well, where we voted no. We did so not only because of problems with its content, but also because we had not been supplied with sufficient information, and because the conditions formulated by the European Parliament had been disregarded during the negotiations. It is due in part to Parliament’s ‘no’ vote then that this time the negotiations were more transparent and there was dialogue between the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the European Commission. Some of the expectations we had expressed at the beginning of the process have been incorporated into the draft agreement. Nevertheless, the agreement is unsatisfactory on a number of points. Still, I believe that the European Parliament should approve this agreement. If we do not do so, the data will come into the possession of the United States in the same way as before, without any uniform guarantee to European citizens concerning the follow-up of their data or legal remedy. Things would be the same as before. Data protection would be regulated by bilateral agreements, in the conclusion of which individual Member States would have even less negotiating power than the European Commission has now. I do not consider this draft agreement to be a good one, but I am for its adoption because this is what provides the European Parliament with an opportunity to obtain, through common review and monitoring, information about the way the agreement is implemented and to demand its suspension and renegotiation if necessary. Passengers will be able to follow up on who is in possession of their data and what they are doing with them. It will give European airlines legal certainty. I insistently call on the European Commission to keep a close eye on the implementation of the agreement, the use of passenger data and the management of sensitive information, and to report everything to Parliament. If the implementation of the agreement brings about any practical violation of the protection of European citizens’ data, it should suspend and renegotiate it."@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