By Chris Jones - 9th July 2007
STRASBOURG: Europe has given in to the US without a fight over the transfer of airline passenger name data, an MEP has warned.
Sophie in’t Veld, the Dutch Liberal who is parliament’s rapporteur on the controversial dossier, said that a new agreement between Washington and Brussels fell far short of guaranteeing the protection of European citizens.
“The agreement is supposed to provide a legal basis for carriers to transfer personal data to US authorities, as well as ensure adequate protection of personal data and rights of EU citizens,” she said.
“On the latter it fails miserably.”
In’t Veld was speaking after MEPs met with EU justice commissioner Franco Frattini on Monday night to discuss the agreement, thrashed out by negotiators from the German EU presidency.
Parliament has no right of co-decision on the issue, which is primarily a matter for member states, and in’t Veld said she was disappointed that few if any of parliament's concerns had been addressed by the Germans or the commission.
“I do not agree with commissioner Frattini that this was the best agreement we could get under the circumstances – although I am at least thankful that we have one agreement and not 27 different ones with each member state.”
“But for the Germans to admit before negotiations had even begun that we were in a weak position is like lying down before the first blow has even been struck,” in’t Veld said.
Negotiators from both sides of the Atlantic have been forced to discuss a new agreement on the transfer of passenger name records (PNR) after the European court ruled that an earlier deal in 2004 contravened EU data protection rules.
But with the US insisting that the EU give its security services access to EU passenger data – or face the prospect of a blanket ban on all flights into the US – Europe has had little room for manoeuvre.
Frattini insisted that some progress had been made, with a reduction in the amount of data that would be transferred and more stringent checks on how the information was used.
But in’t Veld dismissed the commission’s assurances, saying that there were too many loopholes that would allow the data to be used for purposes other than the fight against terrorism.
As for the reduction in the number of data fields, it is “a cosmetic reduction” according to the MEP.
“The data are the same, but they have been merged into fewer data fields. It is a con trick.”
Frattini’s insistence that the agreement was legally binding, providing greater protection for EU data, was also dismissed by the rapporteur.
“The assurances by the US are not part of the agreement and are not therefore binding. They are paying lip service to the issue of protection.”
She added that calls to extend existing US data protection rules to EU citizens would not be of much help, since the database containing all the PNR data was not covered by this legislation.
In’t Veld was particularly angry that national parliaments had not had the chance to discuss the data agreement before the deal was signed on their behalf by German interior minister Wolfgang Schäuble – and that they had not been consulted earlier about the way negotiations were going.
But she said it was unlikely that parliament would back a call for a resolution asking national parliaments to vote against the agreement.
“What we don’t need right now is another no,” she said. “Remember that the one party that did not want this agreement was the US department of homeland security, who wanted to carry on as before.”
“At least with the agreement we have some sort of legal basis for the transfer of data, even if it could be a lot better.”
“But the deal could be challenged in the national courts, so we have not given up all hope.”
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.