On the Lisbon Summit

Francis Wurtz, Präsident der GUE/NLG

Von GUE/NGL press officer (10.10.2007)

Declaration by Francis WURTZ, GUE/NGL President:

I will not raise the subject again today of our group's overall assessment of the new draft treaty. We are opposed to it, not for nationalistic reasons, but because none of the underlying criticisms which marked the discussions on the former draft constitutional treaty have been taken into account. I am certain that we will pay for this recklessness sooner or later.

But, in the immediate future, I would like to look more closely at one specific article – Article 24 – of the new draft Treaty on the Union. Consensus seems to have been reached among us to a large extent on the need to call this article into question, and so much the better.

This a very sensitive question: the protection of citizens regarding the processing of their personal data. The legislative procedure which would apply would differ according to whether this data is dealt with within the Union or is transmitted in a third country. In the first instance, Parliament would have full competency; in the second, it would be completely deprived of it. This amounts to a legal outrage and a serious attack on democracy.

In fact, it brings us back directly to the precedent set by the PNR affair, where the Council agreed to transfer to the American authorities confidential data on passengers travelling to the United States, and this despite the complete opposition of the European Parliament. The Council wants to perpetuate this situation and is empowering itself to do so. This is unacceptable! The Parliament should make this clear to the European Council – if possible without capitulating at the last minute?

I would simply add the following: this contentious matter indirectly reveals several issues to which my group has constantly been drawing attention.

First, the small effective impact of the Charter of Fundamental

Rights. Article 8 of this Charter is specifically devoted to the „protection of personal data“, this protection is happily breached under the terms of the new treaty and is even more likely to be so in the future.

Then, the almost indecipherable nature of certain key passages in the treaties. Only a very educated reading of it could detect this kind of trap.

Lastly, the deliberate opacity of the IGC's work, poles apart from a public and transparent drafting of a text that is supposed to determine the life and the future a Union of 27 member states and half a billion citizens.

All of this consolidates us in our twofold democratic demand for a major pluralist debate in all Member States on the issues at stake in the treaties and that of a ratification by referendum.