Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-23-Speech-1-103"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
dcterms:Is Part Of
lpv:document identification number
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Mr Vice-President of the Commission, the Europol package is made up of four draft decisions that seek to implement the Council Decision of 6 April 2009. Firstly, Mr President, I wish to join with my fellow Members in asking for the Council proposal to be withdrawn. We want a Parliament that is much more visible and a Treaty of Lisbon that makes the decisions with regard to the Europol package. We want Parliament and the Council to be on an equal footing and in balance with each other. In order to ensure that the reasons for my rejection of the proposal are better understood, I will say a few words about the subject of my report. One of the main tasks entrusted to the European Police Office is the job of collecting, storing, processing, analysing and exchanging information and data. So that it can carry out this important task, the competent authorities in the Member States need to send comprehensive, up-to-date, accurate information to Europol. This is the only way that Europol will be able to use its capacity for analysis to the full. The scope of application of the draft Council Decision is limited, as defined in Article 2, to the processing of data for the purpose of analysis, in accordance with the mandate given in Article 14(1) of the Decision. To this end, Europol currently has 19 types of work files for the purpose of analysis. Each work file is a separate database, each linked to a specific type of criminal activity. Each database is therefore closely linked to the specific type of operational support that Europol can offer pursuant to the powers vested in it. Currently, the work files are the only legal tool at European level for storing, processing and analysing information, whether it be information from the field or intelligence, including personal data. The proposal also contains rules and general principles relating to both technical measures and rules for using them. The need to collect and process information means that a legal instrument must be created that guarantees full respect of fundamental rights. I would like to point out that this means full respect of the fundamental rights of European citizens. At the same time, such an instrument must guarantee that Europol can carry out the functions assigned to it in full. In this respect, echoing Mrs in ’t Veld, I question whether or not the legal basis it is intended to apply is correct. In this area, Mr President, the role of the European Parliament as the House representing citizens is inalienable. The compulsory control by the European Parliament is inalienable. For this reason, it is essential that, in view of the immediate entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, Parliament takes part in the legislative process on an equal footing with the Council. No grounds for urgency could carry more weight than the importance of defending civil liberties and the security of Europeans. I therefore urge my esteemed fellow Members to join in rejecting the proposed instruments, without lessening our support for the European Police Office – which we do indeed support – until the Council allows Parliament to be part of the decision-making process. I also propose that we ask the Commission and the Council to withdraw the proposal and put forward a fresh one that respects the competences laid down in the Treaty of Lisbon. Mr President, when I speak again, I will give a more convincing and clearer explanation of my position. That is all for the moment."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:


The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph