Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-01-20-Speech-3-172"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100120.14.3-172"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"There was a particular intervention, I think it was Mrs Harms, referring to the possible publication of one of the language versions. Obviously, I do not have that information. I will check it out and let you know the situation in writing. What I have told you is that on 25 January, the agreement which will come into force provisionally on 1 February will be in the hands of the European Parliament. In accordance with European law, in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty of Lisbon and in accordance with the Vienna Convention, signed agreements can provisionally come into force. Therefore, it is valid.
For the European Union and, of course, for the Council, it is important that this agreement remains in force. It is important that these agreements on the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme remain in force. We feel that it is a positive step, that it serves the struggle against terrorism, and that it involves collaboration with the United States, which is a trustworthy country, a partner country, a neighbour, which has the same purpose as ourselves: the fight against terrorism. This has nothing to do with the delay in receiving the language versions, it is definitely not an excuse, Mr Schulz. It is not a matter of gaining time, Mr Weber.
As you know, a few weeks ago, or months even, the Swedish Presidency, the Council, suggested sending this version in a single language to Parliament, from the Council, and the Commission realised that this was not possible, that it had to be the actual Commission which would produce the language versions and send them all on. The Council had good intentions on the part of the Swedish Presidency, but it was not possible either legally or technically. That is the reason it has arrived now. I understand that the European Parliament would have liked to have this version earlier. I agree absolutely. If I had been an MEP, I would think exactly the same and would have wanted to have these versions earlier. It did not happen that way for the reason I told you. It has nothing to do with gaining time, or hiding anything, nor is it an excuse. Absolutely not.
I think this is an agreement where the European Parliament will have the full capacity to take part, because the Lisbon Treaty has come into force and we have – I think a great majority of us – adopted that treaty, and that will give Parliament the capacity to take part in a sovereign way. Parliament will be able to, if it wishes, cut short the validity of this provisional agreement. Parliament will take part in the negotiation of the subsequent long-term agreement. The EP, together with the Council, of course, will have all the authority to influence the SWIFT Agreement which we believe is very important, which deserves to be debated in this Parliament, thoroughly, seriously and without haste or pressure, to use an expression that you, yourselves, have already used.
What is more, we are absolutely agreed, Mr Verhofstadt and other speakers, that here it is necessary to respect people’s fundamental rights, the right to privacy and European legislation on data protection. Moreover, now we have another instrument to guarantee these rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which has just come into force because it is linked to the Lisbon Treaty, and that is fully in force. One of the rights that it guarantees is the right to privacy and data protection. Therefore, we have all the conditions to make a good agreement.
As for Mr Verhofstadt’s proposal to send a letter or to immediately reach a Council position on the conditions established by Parliament, I believe that the best thing is that when Parliament has that document, we will be at your disposal to debate it in every sense, with all those conditions and, therefore, to come to a serious, rigorous and unpressured agreement in this respect.
Yes, of course, for the moment, we think it is vital to get this provisional agreement in force and, in any case, Parliament will have all the authority accorded it by the Treaty of Lisbon to ultimately decide whether or not the agreement should go ahead. This will depend on you. It will depend on Parliament as a whole."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples