Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-10-Speech-3-096"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101110.15.3-096"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, in a globalised world, terrorism and crime are, unfortunately, also globally organised, and therefore we know that we need to cooperate internationally and need to exchange data. I am very pleased to hear that both the Commission and the Council consider that citizens’ rights and data protection are both matters to be accorded very high priority. However, that does not mean that Parliament can rest on its laurels, since issues such as retention periods, data volumes and purpose limitation, as well as controls and whether protective clauses can really be implemented in the area of data protection, will remain critical points. In this sensitive area, what we need is not blind checks, but more trust.
The terms on which data is exchanged must therefore also be set at a particularly high level, since it is not just a matter of specific agreements with Australia and the US; a number of other countries such as Korea and India also already want to have PNR agreements with us. For this reason, too, it is very important that we build in particularly high security standards at this point. The same applies to the forwarding of data to third countries. Here again, we must examine very carefully the terms that we want to incorporate.
At the same time, when discussing PNR data, we also need to look beyond this. What is the point of keeping the volume of data as low as possible when negotiating on PNR if the US, as a countermove, announces that it wishes not only to levy an entry fee, but also to collect additional data from passengers?
We also have a problem within the European Union. What is the point of agreeing the highest possible standards and attempting to limit data volumes if, at the same time, bilateral agreements are being concluded without us having any knowledge of their content and security standards? Mrs Malmström has said that this is not about PNR data, but rather that all data that is collected should apparently serve the purpose of fighting terrorism and combating crime. I would therefore like to end by making one more request: what we need is not just good provisions on the individual measures, but also at last to take an overall view of all the measures, all the data that is transferred by the EU and the Member States. We need to be quite clear about this: we will never achieve one hundred percent security, however many measures we take and however much data we collect. That is a fact that we have to face up to."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples