Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-11-Speech-1-109"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020311.8.1-109"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, first of all may I say that I have much sympathy with the remarks that have just been passed by Mr Harbour. He has spoken very clearly and I am sure that Commissioner Bolkestein has listened carefully to what he had to say.
I take this, however, from a slightly different tack. The position of the Data Protection Supervisor is of enormous importance. The Charter of Fundamental Rights which I helped to prepare states that everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her and the Amsterdam Treaty called for the establishment of an independent supervisor by 1 January, 1999. This deadline is, of course, well past and our main priority, therefore, is to create this post as soon as we possibly can. The urgency of the matter should not in itself be an excuse for us to rush it through without proper discussion. Indeed, the salary of both the Data Protection Supervisor and his assistant has resulted in numerous discussions within our committees.
Many people, myself included, were unhappy about the unreasonably high salary of the supervisor, which will of course be comparable to that of the Ombudsman. But I contrast this discussion with the kind which one might have in a national parliament where, frankly, the issue itself is of such dramatic importance to the establishment of this role that it ought perhaps to be dealt with not in this particular plenary but elsewhere. We are not as flexible as I would like. Most of the matters relating to the post have already been laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and published in the Official Journal. I know that the Secretariat has also declared a number of the amendments to be out of order for various reasons and this has caused concern among many colleagues. Internal politics has also been a feature of this debate.
It is unfortunate, that there is no single data protection instrument for all the pillars. As a member of the Future of Europe Convention, I do hope, indeed I might even anticipate, that at the conclusion of the work that we shall be doing, it may well be that the protection of the private citizen and the interests of the private citizen, both in terms of the work of the Ombudsman – which I highly value and respect – and also in connection with data protection issues, will be spelled out very clearly as something in need of development in the future. I hope, therefore, that whatever we decide – and I do hope that we decide to proceed with this post when we vote on this week – we will return to the matter and at an appropriate moment, perhaps, during discussion of the next Treaty or before then, we will look at ways of endorsing the position of citizens and making sure their relationship with institutions in Europe is a properly balanced one."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples