Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-12-Speech-1-103"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011112.9.1-103"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the return of this file to committee has certainly made the positions clearer, but I feel it has not improved the result: it fact it has, to some extent, had quite the opposite effect. Indeed, last time it voted, the European Parliament had the wisdom to accept the Commission’s proposal at least on the point relating to electronic directories, thereby ensuring that each of us is free to choose whether to be included in a public directory. Thus, the decision, which I consider to be a mistake and damaging not just in terms of freedom but of the very development of electronic commerce as well, to allow the sending of unwanted messages while leaving recipients the option to complain and request not to be sent any more, appeared to be less harmful too.
By refusing the proposal for opting into public directories for everybody, without even making an exception for mobile phones, we are all placing ourselves at the mercy of all kinds of annoying petitioners and solicitors. We do not even have the protection that once existed in the days when there were only fixed telephones and printed directories. In those days, we could protect ourselves effectively by becoming ex-directory or changing our telephone numbers. Nowadays, when every public directory ends up on the Internet, we have no way of protecting ourselves. We can ask for our phone number or e-mail address to be deleted but it is no use! By now, it is in the hands of users and parties who cannot be traced. Therefore, deciding to amend Article 12 of the directive would really appear not to benefit us in terms of freedom and, quite frankly, I fail to understand how we can give freedom of advertising precedence over individual freedoms.
As far as unsolicited messages, as mentioned in Article 13 of the directive, are concerned, giving the Member States the choice takes away the usefulness of the directive itself in view of the need for harmonisation. Quite frankly, I cannot believe that all this will benefit electronic commerce. In fact, I feel that, as well as people such as our rapporteur, who is expert at using electronic tools, there are also still many, many citizens like myself who have little aptitude for such tools and are therefore concerned. To be honest, I can promise you that I will not be sending requests to any businesses and I will not open any messages for fear that what currently happens to me will continue, even though I am protected in my country, namely that my provider, no less, which has of necessity to know my address, constantly sends me unwanted communications and so, alas, does an airline which I once made the mistake of emailing.
I therefore feel that, until I am protected – I am speaking on my own behalf but there are also many other people, older people like myself or people who have less expertise than many young people – I will do without electronic commerce, because it is not something in which I have confidence. The idea of being in a directory which is accessible throughout the entire Internet, of receiving messages and then requesting that they be deleted, of having to open them first, of having to try and understand these tools, does not inspire me with confidence. It may be that as electronic commerce develops, it will provide greater protection, but it does need to develop first. We must start by allowing electronic commerce to develop, but in order to do so we need to have confidence in it, and this proposal does not inspire that confidence."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples