Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-05-Speech-3-029"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070905.2.3-029"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, coming from London I in no way minimise the terrorist threat. Indeed, we Londoners have endured it for decades, including when it was Irish Republican terrorism part-funded from the United States. The moral high ground is a precarious location.
Europol tells us that there were almost 500 terrorist attacks in the EU last year. Of course it is a major criminal threat, but so are drug smuggling, people trafficking and corruption. Where is the Council action to insist that all Member States sign and ratify the European Convention on Human Trafficking? Where was the Council protest when the UK Government terminated a major corruption probe in January against ‘national champion’ arms manufacturer BAE?
Just because Liberals question the effectiveness of the liquids ban compared to its inconvenience, or challenge the mass collection of personal data, does not mean that we are soft on terrorism. No area of policy should escape democratic accountability.
I was proud to be Vice-Chair of the European Parliament’s Enquiry on Extraordinary Rendition and I share the outrage others have expressed on the complete silence of the Council in the face of our findings that many Member States were complicit in massive human rights abuses, of abduction and torture.
The Council would do well to look in its own backyard before it gobbles up the civil liberties of EU citizens. MEPs have had no information on the implementation of the Framework Decision on Terrorism passed over five years ago. Has every Member State fully transposed it? How many cases have there been? How many investigations or convictions have been recorded? We know that agencies, even within one state, will not share information because of jealousies, power struggles and turf wars, let alone through cross-border cooperation. Why not make that a priority instead of frenetically legislating to take away our privacy all the time?
There is also a lot of inconsistency when it comes to tackling radicalism. This is an important subject, but it also implies the integration of the vast majority of moderate Muslims, and yet there are parts of the EU where great difficulties are placed in the way of the building of mosques. Why not look at that?
Mr Szymański expressed an extreme right-wing view that we cannot pay too high a price for security. I could not disagree with that more fundamentally. Is it not what the Communists said to justify their repression? Instead of trading too much liberty for security, let us look at what really works: targeted investigations and intelligence-led policing. That is the way to keep public confidence and cooperation."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples