Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-311"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030923.10.2-311"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, as I said to the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs on 9 September 2003, and in accordance with the messages I received from Members of Parliament on that occasion, the Commission is pursuing its negotiations with the American authorities which receive passenger name record data transferred from the European Union with a view to obtaining improved undertakings on four major issues.
Regarding passenger consent, which was mentioned by some Members as a possible way out - at least in the short term - this would not, in our view, constitute a legally-secure, longer-term solution. First, making consent unambiguous would prove very burdensome in practice. Second, the result would be a transfer of data that – despite being legal in the EU – would still lack any significant protection on the American side. Therefore, securing the best possible undertakings from the United States on the way in which they will treat the data collected from EU citizens is much to be preferred.
The oral question submitted by Mrs Boogerd-Quaak also refers to what should happen if an adequacy finding cannot be reached by the end of the year. She proposes to stop the data transfers that are not in accordance with the principles of non-discrimination, prior informed consent and an efficient appeals procedure, and to begin immediate negotiations on an international agreement with the United States. These measures reflect to some extent the options for possible courses of action that I outlined in my meeting with the LIBE Committee earlier this month.
However, as I stressed then, we should be very prudent not to shoot ourselves in the foot. Enforcement action may be superficially attractive, but it is not clear that its consequences would be those that we seek. Therefore, let us cross that bridge when we come to it. Political judgments will have to be exercised at the right moment. It is clear that the course we shall follow will fully involve the Parliament and the Council.
I am sure we can all agree on the need to unite to combat terrorism. But we equally agree on the need to avoid security concerns becoming an excuse for dismantling our civil rights and liberties. I should like to assure the House that the Commission will continue to devote its unstinting efforts to finding an agreed solution with the United States on this important but also very delicate issue. The solution needs to be found as a matter of urgency, and must respect the law on both sides of the Atlantic.
First, I will touch upon purpose limitation. So far, the United States has refused to limit its use of passenger name record data to the fight against terrorism. The Americans also want to cover other serious domestic criminal offences. So far, they have not been prepared to further narrow these down.
Second, as far as the scope of the data required is concerned, the United States requires 39 different PNR elements, which it is hard to regard as necessary for or proportionate to the purpose. The Commission is seeking a reduction in the list of 39 data elements from the United States.
Thirdly, the data storage periods are still far too long. Mrs Boogerd-Quaak has stressed that they last six to seven years.
Fourth, American undertakings are insufficiently legally-binding, since the available extra-judicial redress mechanisms are not fully independent. Therefore we must insist that rights are, to the greatest possible extent, legally-binding and thus actionable before American courts.
Currently, we are working with the target date of Christmas 2003, the date that I set when I last spoke to the LIBE Committee. Ideally, an adequacy decision should be well on track by that time. An adequacy decision will only be possible, however, if the United States is ready to improve significantly its undertakings.
I must be frank with the House and say that I am not confident that we shall be able to secure the necessary significant improvements in order for the Commission to be able to make an adequacy finding. However, progress in the United States' commitments is in any case necessary for any kind of solution, whatever its legal form - be it an adequacy finding or, if supported by the European Parliament, a bilateral international agreement.
The most recent step in our negotiations with the United States was the meeting which I held yesterday with Under Secretary Asa Hutchinson of the US Department of Homeland Security - he is the number two person in that department. That was a useful meeting in which we discussed all the main issues and agreed to put our officials to work to make further efforts to find a solution in the coming weeks. When I am in Washington in mid-October I expect to meet with senior Homeland Security officials, including, hopefully, Secretary Tom Ridge. I emphasised to Mr Hutchinson yesterday the urgency of finding a solution – and of course I also referred to the serious concern with which PNR transfers are viewed in this Parliament.
I find it difficult to accept any remark that the Commission is tolerating the situation and not doing its job as Guardian of the Treaties. As far as the Data Protection Directive is concerned, applying the law is a job for the Member States and their data protection authorities. The Commission's immediate role is to ensure that it is the Member States that respect the directive, not the airlines. But the problem, in any case, is not one that we can solve via purely intra-European means. We have a conflict of laws with the United States and that is the heart of the matter. In my talks with the United States authorities, I hope to be firm. But being entirely inflexible on the European side will not necessarily obtain more flexibility from our counterparts."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples