Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-12-14-Speech-3-333-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111214.26.3-333-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, there is no doubt that this House supports transparency and openness towards citizens. Obviously, my group, the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), does so, too. However, this report goes way beyond the actual goal. Existing legislation and interinstitutional agreements are ignored and the protection of competition cases and sensitive and personal data is treated with contempt. Among other things, this massively violates data protection, which we so vehemently support in other contexts. Are we now to sacrifice the privacy of the global population? This is precisely the risk we face with this report, because administrative procedures and decisions, which also include personnel matters, for example, are to be made public. The same applies to the protection of business secrets and sensitive information within the framework of approval procedures, court cases and competition cases.
With its definitions that are vague, far too broad and lacking in clarity, the report also allows public access to these types of documents, as documents are taken to mean any data or content connected in any way with the policies, measures and decisions of all bodies and institutions of the EU. This largely also includes preparatory, confidential and secret documents, as well as all associated information. Thus, the definition covers not only documents, but also information. Even information from ongoing interinstitutional processes, such as informal trialogue negotiations, will have to be made public.
Do you really know what that means, Mr Cashman? It means public access to procedures. It means public influence on the decision-making process. In that case, we might just as well sit the lobbyists at the table and let them negotiate! Is that what citizens want? I cannot believe that that is the case.
In addition, documents relating to non-legislative procedures – measures dealing with internal organisation and so on – are also to be made public. Where is the public interest in that? Is this not more likely to obstruct our work?
This report is not in the interests of our citizens. It will result in a flood of useless information. It will make our work impossible and, above all, it is unacceptable to the other institutions because it contravenes current legislation. You are aware of that, Mr Cashman, and by doing this you are essentially working against greater transparency and against the citizens."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples