Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-10-26-Speech-3-419-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-10-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EU-Australia agreement on the processing and transfer of PNR data (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20111026.24.3-419-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-10-26-Speech-3-420-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Birgit Sippel2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iraq (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, PNR data is nothing new – after all this information has been gathered since commercial aviation was in its infancy. Likewise, the use of this data, for example for border control purposes, is nothing new. Nonetheless, a problem arises here which is also familiar in other areas: in an increasingly mobile world with modern information technology, data is available in quite different dimensions than was the case 50 or even 30 years ago. This is also the reason why data protection is becoming increasingly important. We have achieved a great deal with this agreement: a clear definition of potential uses, good data protection standards and clear rules for legal certainty and judicial remedy. The changeover from the pull system to the push system is also important. Data is not simply collected, but is sent to Australia. We have not been able to achieve all our demands, however. One of the major points at issue from our perspective is the five-and-a-half-year retention period. We would have liked to see a much shorter period. So, what can we do about it? Do we vote in favour of the agreement or do we reject it? I would like to make two comments. We will never achieve one hundred per cent of our demands. So, we need to weigh things up. Data would continue to be transferred even if we rejected the agreement, however then we would have no clear rules on how this data should be handled. That is why I hope that this agreement will receive majority support tomorrow, despite many reservations. In relation to the forthcoming agreement with the US, I would like to state clearly: we want an agreement here too, but a 15-year retention period is a much longer time. I genuinely fail to see why we cannot change over completely to the push system here. We need to make improvements in this area. We want uniform standards for all agreements in relation to PNR data, rather than a patchwork of arrangements in which the rights of our citizens are dealt with in different ways."@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