Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2014-03-11-Speech-2-767-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20140311.72.2-767-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, Mr Kirkhope’s stance against this report shows why the coalition government in London has been unable to do what President Obama has done – to instigate a review of the surveillance practices, legal framework and oversight of the intelligence agencies, and in particular GCHQ. I am therefore delighted that at least the smaller party in the coalition, the Liberal Democrats, is acting.
My party leader, the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, has instigated an independent review. I would direct you to the website of the prestigious Royal United Services Institute for his speech and the terms of reference. My party also passed a resolution for a digital bill of rights at our congress last weekend, including a demand to end the bulk collection of data. So, even if we cannot get the whole government acting, we are advancing a review from the Deputy Prime Minister.
I support this report; I just have a few quibbles about it. I am not terribly fond of the goal of EU Independence in the IT sector, which is called for in paragraphs 97 and 131. I absolutely want investment to enhance the capacity of Europe in IT, but in a global world, what I want is for us to get a new a global deal on protecting our privacy. I think it reeks too much of protectionism and autarchy, and I am also not sure what a European cloud achieves. Ditto the same remarks: I want European competence and for us to keep data in Europe if possible, but I am a bit unsure about the European cloud."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples