Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-29-Speech-1-068"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040329.7.1-068"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, first of all, I should like to warmly congratulate Mrs Boogerd-Quaak on her excellent and clear political analyses and on her perseverance. That perseverance will yet come in useful.
I will repeat myself yet again: it is necessary to fight terrorism, but not all means are justified. The agreement we are discussing today is one such means, which overshoots the mark when it comes to fighting terrorism. Although the Commission, in its adequacy finding, has concluded that the United States offers a suitable level of protection for the passenger details that are transferred, I am not all that convinced. The present agreement offers EU citizens insufficient guarantees. There are no satisfactory legal means for citizens who get into difficulties, as has been demonstrated in the examples that a number of Members have given. Moreover, it is explicitly stipulated that the details can also be used for other purposes, such as the domestic fight against crime in the United States. In that respect, the third party to which the details are passed on is not specified, and it is very difficult to monitor what happens to them.
The Article 29 working party has come to the unanimous conclusion that this agreement contravenes European legislation. In fact, the Council, too, carefully mooted the idea in February that the American measures might be in conflict with European national legislation and this doubt, as Mr Watson has already remarked in relation to the most recent European Council, has not been taken away – quite the opposite. It therefore looks as if the Commission is the only institution still holding to its conclusions concerning the suitable level of protection. Maybe the time has come for the Commission to acknowledge the error of its ways and admit that it has gone beyond its remit. The present proposal is inadequate and that is why the Commission has to submit a fresh proposal, one containing sufficient protection mechanisms for the European public.
For nearly a year now, European legislation has been broken under the pretext of fighting terrorism. If the Commission is so convinced that this agreement meets European legislation and does not contravene the Treaty, it is really beyond me why it is not prepared to apply the procedure of Article 300 of the EC Treaty and have the Court of Justice carry out a few verifications. I am therefore pleased that this option is still open in the resolution before us. Indeed, the fight is not over by a long way."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples