Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-04-19-Speech-4-096-000"

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	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120419.4.4-096-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-04-19-Speech-4-097-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Sophia in 't Veld2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; ALDE (2009-07-20--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Democraten 66 (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ECON (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; LIBE (2012-01-23--2014-06-30)3 member; FEMM (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, very quickly, first of all, I would like to clear up a misunderstanding. I have said this countless times: nobody in this House disputes the need to use data in the fight against terrorism and serious transnational crime, Mrs Foster – nobody. But we do dispute the use of these data for other purposes like communicable diseases, as the Commission said, and immigration and customs checks. Secondly, I would like to put a question to the Commission. You have a certain interpretation of Article 4 that is not shared by everybody, but what is key here is this: is it shared by the United States authorities and how do we know? Thirdly, I would like to address Mrs Corazza Bildt. Yes, politics is about compromises, but certain things are not negotiable, like fundamental rights and EU law. I do not understand how we are able to reach a good agreement or an acceptable agreement with our Australian friends and not with our American friends and allies. That escapes me completely. I think the analysis by our EPP colleague, Mr Engel, was spot on. Without the agreement, we do not have weaker safeguards, because the safeguards that are there are provided by existing US legislation and will still be there, even if we vote down this agreement. On push and pull, Commissioner, as Renate Weber right said, not all carriers will shift to ‘pull’, and you know and we know that this clause is not enforceable. Even if ‘push’ is in place, as it is today, ‘pull’ is still being used. This means that the Americans go into our computer systems and pull the data. I have not heard you answer my question: why do you qualify as ‘exceptional’ tens of thousands of pulls – up to 82 000 – a day? How, frankly, do you qualify that as exceptional? Finally, on monitoring. If the experience with the SWIFT Agreement and the monitoring of that is anything to go by, monitoring is a joke. One last question. Colleagues, ask yourselves, look yourselves in the eye and ask yourselves: if other countries knock on our door and ask – and we know that they will, as Qatar and Japan have already done, and South Korea and Cuba will come, South Africa will come, China and Russia too – are we willing to give them our data for use in profiling on the same terms as we are doing for the United States now? That is a key question."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Sophia in 't Veld,"1 "rapporteur."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph