Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-26-Speech-3-253"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051026.18.3-253"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
I should like to make a couple of points directly in reply to the points that the honourable Member has raised.
Firstly, the British Presidency is committed to securing agreement on the data-retention measure before the end of the year, as I said, and is taking forward work on substance in consultation with the Commission and European Parliament alike, which have made these points. We remain committed, however, to the belief that retention of specific communications data for a fixed period is a proportionate reaction to the threat of terrorism and that the associated costs are not excessive.
On the specific point of the pillar under which we should make progress, it is important to add one point to the discussions that have taken place in Parliament today, and that is to say very honestly that I do not believe our citizens will care whether the measure is decided under the first or third pillar. What we need is a proposal that can be agreed quickly and will allow for effective law enforcement without threatening the fundamental rights of European Union citizens.
On the specific point that the honourable Member raised, we agree that all retained data must be held securely in line with data protection principles and that information exchange must be accompanied by high standards of protection. Police and other public authorities will not have unrestricted access to the retained data and will have to meet national standards to access private information. The content of calls or messages – as I sought to suggest earlier – would not be retained. It is merely a question of providers keeping records of who called whom, where and when. This is part of striking the balance that we believe is necessary between protecting people from terrorism and serious crime and, on the other hand, respecting civil rights.
We believe, therefore, that our response must be proportionate and respect common democratic values. We must defend our communities from the threat of attack while upholding human rights in accordance with international law and the ECHR. For let us be very clear: the terrorists want to attack not only our lives but also our way of life."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples