Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-204"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-09-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010905.5.3-204"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-09-05-Speech-3-1892
lpv:speaker	lp:Konstantinos Alyssandrakis2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Kommounistiko Komma Elladas (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3
lpv:translated text	". The only good thing about the report by the Temporary Committee on the Echelon Interception System is that it admits that such a system exists and that similar systems also probably exist. However, it tries to take our mind off our concerns by playing down its powers and general impact. Worst of all, the report attempts to give personal and other data collection a legal basis, considering it a legitimate tool in helping to develop an EU security and defence policy to serve the needs of the rapid reaction force, to fight “terrorism” etc. It also considers that collaboration is needed with the intelligence services of the Member States of the ΕU. All in all, it "urges the Member States to review and, if necessary, to adapt their own legislation on the operations of the intelligence services to ensure that it is consistent with fundamental rights as laid down in the ECHR and with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights”. The report talks of “democratic monitoring and control” and “calls on the monitoring bodies responsible for scrutinising the activities of the secret services, when exercising their monitoring powers, to attach great importance to the protection of privacy, regardless of whether the individuals concerned are their own nationals, other EU nationals or third country nationals”. It voices a degree of concern about industrial espionage, clearly in order to protect the excessive profits raked in by the monopolies. In all events, the report proposes encoding messages as the main form of protection. These positions are irritating and most provocative when compared with the rudimentary demand for protection for privacy and for trade union and political activity. They are an attempt to convince us that we need to live with monitoring, with the personal electronic files of the Schengen Agreement and under the watchful eye of Europol and to shift the onus of protection to each and every one of us. It is for these reasons that the MEPs of the Communist Party of Greece voted against the report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph