Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-23-Speech-3-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080423.3.3-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"(
) I shall attempt to provide answers to certain dilemmas and issues which you have particularly highlighted. First of all, I should like to say that it is extremely important that at the last Council held on 18 April a consensus was achieved, and that the Commission has been granted a mandate to commence with negotiations. This is extremely important, so that we can work in such a manner, as you yourself have repeatedly expressed here today, in the spirit and in order that all European citizens have equal rights and, of course, equal obligations.
If I should touch upon some specific points that have been mentioned here earlier, I would like to say that, at the outset of negotiations, as one of the Members of Parliament has already mentioned, we have not been able to accept a strategy which has in a way been forced upon Europe. I should say that, maybe under the initial pressure when this strategy was set up, we managed to resist it. We have concluded the agreements, we have found a way of resolving this, we have achieved a twin-track cooperation approach for the future and therefore, in a way, we have made it clear, both to the United States of America and to the EU Member States, how we can cooperate and where the limits are of what is and what is not acceptable.
I should particularly like to touch upon the issues concerning fingerprints and, of course, the dilemmas that some of you Members of the European Parliament have, primarily as citizens of the EU. It is imperative that we do not confuse the two systems, ESTA and PNR. The PNR system will remain unchanged, the same as it is now, the same as it has been adopted and approved, and this is not about fingerprints being taken at travel agents' or anywhere else. This matter is as it is, and it is neither a subject for discussion nor a subject of any changes. I believe this is extremely important indeed.
On the subject of data protection and concerning the activities of a high level team of experts, I have to say that ever since I have been heading the Council of Ministers and have been presiding the Council I have, in conjunction with the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, acted extremely transparently. I have delivered two reports on this matter to the relevant committees, and today I have made a presentation about current affairs, also before Parliament.
I think that in this first stage we have acted in line with the principle that we find out where the difficulties are, where the common difficulties are, where the common principles are, if there are any, and where there are none. On this basis we shall then be able to proceed with further activities. Further activities and negotiations will begin in 2009, and it is extremely important, provided they begin at all, that we, Parliament, the Council and the Commission, have common ground. This is the only way we shall muster enough power to reach an agreement. I believe that your Parliament too has decided that this agreement is extremely important for us, so that we have a data protection umbrella and, each time we negotiate an agreement, we do not have to raise this again, and this is our objective. These were not some negotiations connected with the reaching of an agreement. Certain principles have been studied. On this basis we shall see, and we already know, that twelve principles are practically identical. Should the negotiations begin, the principle that is not identical will, of course, be the subject of negotiation as well. I hope that our negotiations will be successful.
I should also like to point out the matter concerning cooperation between the Member States, the Commission and the Presidency as regards the memoranda, the further talks and implementation programmes. It should be clearly stated that memoranda are not agreements. Memoranda of understanding are expressions of political will that a country would like to become a visa waiver country. They do not contain any elements that would give this document the status of an international agreement.
As regards further talks and implementation agreements and/or implementation rules, we have very intense relations with the Member States. Several days ago, for example, I had very open talks with Jan Langer of the Czech Republic, about these talks and how they are proceeding. At this point there are no written documents yet concerning talks and implementation rules which the United States of America would give any of the Member States.
In my opinion it is most important that the work of the Member States, as well as that of the Commission and the Presidency, remains transparent. Only in such a triangle, and of course also in some areas of cooperation with the European Parliament, can a suitable manner of addressing this issue be achieved. However, I think that we shall let the Commissioner, the Vice-President, provide answers to several issues that fall within the competence of the Commission."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"SL"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples