Rubbish debate.
Watching the stream of the Debate on the introduction of Data Retention Directive. The live stream is all the excitement of the European Parliament on your very own screen.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/avservices/ebs/welcome_en.cfm
To get hold of the stream just click on the green EBS Live button on the right. Then click on the EN button on the player, or you’l get them all talking in their own languages.
Nonetheless, watching them, the quality of yap is very variable. Currently, we have a Finnish MEP speaking in English- concerned about the costs. He thinks that they have a rule that only stupid crooks will fall under- the others will use hotmail and pre-paid GSM mobiles. Finally he hopes that the compromise that was hammered out in the LIBE committee would be adopted by the Parliament- rather than the hardline version from the UK Presidency.
All names are guessed at, by probably mishearing them as they are called out by the speaker.
Brain Crowley: Basically supports Data Retention, as long as member states can keep their own longer laws. Also seeks clarification on whether Minister McDowells legal objection to sending this matter to the EP at all has been addressed.
Mr. Gurk [Hungarian](4 mins) Generally raising objectives to be aimed for at the EP. Points out that as a young man, his parents used to say to him “hush, that is not for the phone” if he mentioned politics, as it was generally known that the line was bugged.
Mrs Sogrestan: Urges the EP to work with the Council and the Commission.
Unintroduced speaker (young, female, coloured scarf): against the proposal, for the LIBE committee compromise, questions what serious crimes will be included – will it be also using a filesharing network?
And so on.
Personal statement at the end, from one of the leaders of the big parties, saying that there wasn’t a backroom deal, and that the LIBE committee proposal was rejected by the Greens too, so there was no point involving them in trying to get a compromise.
Charles Clark MP stands up at the end and says that he’s not bringing in a police state- quite the opposite- that this law is instead an example of the rule of law. Says that McDowell’s objections were rejected by the legal advice of the Council. Assures us that any country that wants longer retention periods (including specifically Poland’s proposed 15 years) can apply to the Commission who will read why they want it and decide if it is proportionate.
And there we go- next business on the agenda the report on Human Rights.
The Pro-Retention side seems confident of success. It would take defections from the party line of the big parties (represented here by FG MEPs and Labour’s Mr. De Rossa) to lose the vote tomorrow. That vote will be held at 11.30am tomorrow.
If you haven’t contacted your MEPs by now, you can find out how to do it in this word document: Contacts for Irish MEPs. Though Simon Coveney’s Brussels office number seems to be wrong. They are in Strasbourg at the moment, but their main staffs are in Brussels, so it is worth trying both numbers. And all the emails are checked regularly, but they are suffering from a new spam filter, I’m told, which has taken to eating letters from their constituents so a follow up call to confirm receipt can’t go amiss.