Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-29-Speech-4-104-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-09-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Security scanners (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110929.5.4-104-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-09-29-Speech-4-105-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Rui Tavares2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Mercosur countries (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; DROI (2011-09-15--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; G/EFA (2011-06-24--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Independente (2011-06-30--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I must admit that I feel rather sad that we are having this debate. This is because it is a perfect example of a parliamentary debate that loses sight of the general picture when it becomes bogged down in technical issues or minor detail. We have just heard Mr Simpson make a point of exceptional demagogy: ‘there is no greater civil liberty than for people to fly safely and securely’. Mr Simpson, there are various civil liberties and it is not just up to the Committee on Transport and Tourism to decide which of these actually matter and are of greater importance than the others. Like the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, I also believe that there are concerns about privacy and health issues here, but they are unlikely to be the last word on the question of body scanners because ultimately, even once these privacy issues have been successfully dealt with, there will remain yet another problem: these body scanners are expensive. It is going to be expensive to introduce these body scanners into airports throughout Europe and, despite what Mr Simpson says, that will not overcome people’s security concerns because, in five or six years from now, there will be new security threats and new types of equipment. In addition, there will always be terrorist threats outside planes, and we have the right to feel safe on trains, in shopping centres and in schools as well. What I am trying to say with this is that there is no cost-benefit analysis in this debate (neither in the Committee on Transport and Tourism nor in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs) that will tell us: is it the citizens of Europe who are asking for this? The answer to this is no. The citizens of Europe are asking for jobs, education and health care. They are not asking for millions to be spent on body scanners. That is something we are forgetting. We are forgetting all about this cost-benefit analysis and we are forgetting all about this part of the debate concerning the real world. That is why this debate is making me sad."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph