Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-11-Speech-3-123"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-10-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Use of passenger data (PNR) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061011.15.3-123"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-10-11-Speech-3-1242
lpv:speaker	lp:Giusto Catania2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; REGI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Partito della Rifondazione Comunista - Sinistra Europea (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iran (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; LIBE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (including Libya) (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transport and illegal detention of prisoners (2006-01-19--2007-02-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the most honest opinion we can express is that we have agreed to blackmail, since unfortunately Europe has in this matter been subjected to blackmail by the United States; that is to say, the US is dealing with single Member States and airlines, which is why we have in practice been coerced into concluding the agreement in question. This – I repeat – is the most politically correct position, which Parliament must express. However, it is as if we are having to defend an agreement that effectively damages European citizens: it is in fact true that nothing has changed, but the agreement that has been annulled by the Court of Justice was a very bad agreement. We would have to put into the hands of the American authorities 34 personal data items, of which, as the Americans themselves testify, only seven or eight would normally be used. If that is how things are, I do not understand why we have to hand over all this information and, furthermore, to put it in the hands of the American intelligence services – a new feature of the agreement – unless anyone maintains that we can trust the CIA. I do not believe that I am speaking just for myself; I consider rather that this Parliament has every reason not to trust the CIA. What has happened in Europe is clear for all to see: Parliament has even set up a special commission on CIA activities in Europe, and there have been discussions on what happened with SWIFT, when it was discovered that our bank accounts were being inspected by the Americans. I therefore remain puzzled and still believe that we cannot trust the activities of United States intelligence agencies. I believe that the agreement in question was not negotiated in the name of European citizens; it certainly was not negotiated in the name of this Parliament, which was completely ignored in the discussion, as Mrs in ‘t Veld recalled a short time ago. In my opinion we must instead involve the European Parliament, just as we need to involve national parliaments, so that this agreement is reached in such a way as to give priority to defending the rights of EU citizens and, above all, ensuring that our personal data is not put into the hands of persons who will certainly not make fitting use of it."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph