MEPs criticized the Council's choice of legal base and demanded to be involved in the drafting of the agreement.
The question of SWIFT first arose in 2006 when the press revealed that the US administrative authorities were accessing data held on the Belgium-based financial network on European citizens without the knowledge of the European authorities. Following pressure by the European Parliament and some Member States, certain guarantees regarding privacy were given and the USA undertook to ensure that the data collected was used purely for anti-terrorist purposes.
In July this year, the press disclosed that a new accord was to be negotiated following a change in the structure of SWIFT. The Civil Liberties Committee had asked for details from Jacques Barrot, Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security, before organising more far-reaching debate this week.
The head of SWIFT, Lázaro Campos, said "today's debate is not about
SWIFT but about cooperation between Europe and the United States" and argued that the new architecture of the financial network, which will include a storage centre in Switzerland for European data, "is a key factor in the security of our clients".
SWIFT "is of benefit to our Member States"
The European anti-terrorism coordinator, Gilles de Kerchove, told the meeting that the "Terrorist Finance Tracking Program" (TFTP), which is based on the
SWIFT network, "is a very precious instrument in Europe too. It is of benefit to our Member States".
Vigilance crucial, say MEPs
Of MEPs who spoke, Stavros Lambrinidis (S&D, EL) asked "Ultimately, is the EU happy that our personal data goes off to the United States?". He said he was "very worried" and called on the Swedish presidency to be vigilant. He was backed by Sophie In't Veld (ALDE, NL), who was unhappy that "in this anti-terrorist policy, the states first do what they want and only afterwards ask if everyone agrees". She wanted the choice of the legal basis to be the subject of an external opinion and the details of the
SWIFT dossier to be made public.
Ernst Strasser (EPP. AT) said it was "important that European data be processed in line with European standards (…). We also need legal certainty for companies and citizens". "It is important to conclude an agreement quickly, involving the European Parliament closely, then to renegotiate with a new mandate after Lisbon".
Timothy Kirkhope (ECR, UK) said "private companies are having to grapple with a difficult situation. We can't just leave them to it". He added, "we must ensure that data are not transferred on the basis of criteria which are not ours".
© European Parliament
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article