Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-02-10-Speech-3-550"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100210.29.3-550"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have listened carefully to the speeches by all the groups and Members on this topic. We have heard some extremely interesting views, and I welcome them.
Finally, yes, the controversial body scanners are now on the agenda, and I believe, as I said in my first speech and as the Commissioners said, too, that it is an issue that we have to tackle. Ideally, we will be able to decide on a common solution at European level. Of course, if we do not, each country will be able to implement its own policies, and probably, even if we do decide on a common solution, there may be some countries that decide to go ahead with their own policies under their own laws. However, there is little doubt that a common position on this matter would be extraordinarily helpful.
In order to adopt such a position, and in line with what I said at the start of this speech, we need a calm and deliberate debate focusing on three elements that are currently being studied by the Commission: firstly, the effectiveness of the scanners (whether or not they are effective, what their limits are and whether or not they can do what we want them to do); secondly, their compatibility with fundamental rights and individual freedoms; and thirdly, their compatibility with the health of the people who will have to pass through them.
I believe these are the three topics that we need to examine. Once the reports are available, we will adopt a common position, which I believe is necessary.
Mr President, I would like to say once again how much I appreciate the speeches made here in the House, which I consider to be extremely useful for the Council’s work.
I would like to remind you, as I did in my first speech, that I am certainly not in favour of holding debates on such a complex and sensitive topic as the fight against terrorism after attacks or apparent attacks.
We obviously need to examine these attacks or apparent attacks to find out what went wrong with our security systems, but there is no doubt, as has been said time and again here this afternoon, that the counter-terrorism policy must be a carefully thought-out, calm and deliberate policy and must be applied in a proportional manner.
If we adopt measures that will undermine our principles, we are probably making a serious mistake. As a result, we need to analyse, for example, what happened in Detroit to try to prevent mistakes, but we must not respond with a knee-jerk reaction after every attack because this would probably result in us adopting measures that, in some cases, would simply not make sense.
Europe has a strategy for its counter-terrorism policy. We have a good strategy for fighting terrorism in the European Union, one that has proven to be effective in recent years. We only have to look at the actions of the security forces in the different countries to see the extent to which, on many occasions, those actions were based on application of the common strategy we introduced a number of years ago.
We have an important figure, a Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, whose speeches are very interesting. Once again, I would recommend that you look in detail at his last speech in this House because I believe it is an excellent speech that highlights the extent of our strategy. Indeed, we have recently been trying to give concrete expression to this strategy through prevention, unlike the early years of its application, when we put much more emphasis on detection.
Of course, the most important element in the fight against terrorism is prevention, in other words, preventing attacks. That is why we are focusing our common efforts, as I said, on prevention. That is also why we are concentrating on aspects such as radicalisation, which I mentioned in my speech, as did the Commissioner. We are keen to analyse the policies being implemented in each country to prevent radicalisation, which is undoubtedly the root cause of many of the terrorist attacks we have suffered in recent years.
We are also keen to ensure the correct exchange of information. This has been emphasised in the House on various occasions. The important thing is not to transmit all of the information that you have, but to transmit the information that is relevant to those who are receiving it. That is the information that needs to be transmitted. The aim is not to swamp ourselves with information, but to have information management tools that make the exchange as effective as possible.
There have been significant improvements recently in the European Union in that regard. We have a strategy that, when implemented, will, for example, improve the functioning of our exchange systems. When I talk about exchange, I am thinking of Europol, I am thinking of Eurojust, I am thinking of COSI, which has been mentioned here by some Members, and, lastly, I am thinking of the exchange of information and how to make it more effective."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples