Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-23-Speech-1-077"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-11-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Electronic communication networks and services (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091123.17.1-077"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-11-23-Speech-1-0782
lpv:speaker	lp:Eva-Britt Svensson2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2011-08-31)3 unknown; Vänsterpartiet (2009-07-14--2011-08-31)3 member; IMCO (2009-07-16--2011-08-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2009-09-16--2011-08-31)3 chair; FEMM (2009-07-16--2011-08-31)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2009-07-16--2011-08-31)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2011-08-31)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2011-08-31)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the telecoms package will be decided on tomorrow. I would like to thank Mrs Trautmann and all of my fellow Members who have fought for a free internet. Above all, I would like to thank all of those citizens who have demonstrated their commitment to this issue. They have got very strongly involved, and quite rightly so, as this is ultimately about freedom of expression and our civil rights and freedoms. It was thanks to our committed citizens that the protection of internet users against monitoring and the abuse of power is better than expected, but, in my opinion and that of the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left, it is not good enough. There are three reasons why I will be voting against this package. Firstly, the compromise – Amendment 138 – does not give citizens sufficient protection against the power of the authorities and internet service providers. It merely refers to a review prior to exclusion – not a judicial review. This could open the way for arbitrary measures. The text prevents the end users’ rights being restricted by the Member States, which is a good thing, but companies can introduce restrictions provided they do so in the agreement. The second reason is that my amendments concerning internet rights, in other words, the well-known Citizens’ Rights Amendments, were not included in the compromise. This, in fact, opens the way for a network where it is not a foregone conclusion that all users will have access to the whole network and where not all sites have the same possibility of being viewed. I think that we should have been very clear that it must not be permitted to lead the internet down such a blind alley. The end result then runs the risk of being more like a collection of cable television channels rather than free communication for everyone. The third reason is that the telecoms package falls within the regulatory framework for the internal market. This means, of course, that in the event of a conflict, it will be the European Court of Justice that decides. Freedom of expression should not be decided by the European Court of Justice. It is not enough to have mediocre protection for citizens’ rights; they must have complete protection."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph