Internal Market Commissioner Frits BOLKESTEIN, together with Commissioners Loyola DE PALACIO, Antonio VITORINO and Chris PATTEN, appeared before Parliament’s Citizens' Rights Committee on Tuesday evening to present details of an agreement freshly reached with the USA, and endorsed on Tuesday by the Commission, on the transfer of the personal data of airline passengers to the US authorities. This arrangement is seen by the Americans as a key part of the fight against terrorism but its compatibility with EU privacy laws has been questioned by many Europeans including numerous MEPs.

In the end a political judgement was needed, explained Mr Bolkestein, saying "Today, the Commission exercised its political judgement in deciding how to take matters forward". He stressed that the negotiations had been "by no means easy" but maintained that the US had made a number of important concessions. "I might say here that Parliament's strong pressure has played a very important role", he added.

According to Mr Bolkestein, most of the sensitive issues that the Commission raised with the US back in June have been resolved, aside from the need for an "independent redress mechanism" that the Commission had advocated. On that point, as the agreement stands, the US Privacy Office would give rulings on complaints. These rulings would be binding on the US Department of Homeland Security.

Describing the gains made by the Commission in reaching this deal, Mr Bolkestein firstly explained that clear limits had been fixed on the amount of data to be transferred, with a closed list of 34 elements. "In practice, most Passenger Name Records (PNR) consist of no more than 10-15 items", he said. Secondly, the US had agreed to store the data for only three and a half years, rather than fifty years as it had initially wanted. "This is related to the expiry of the whole arrangement after three and a half years. We have thus managed to link the lifetime of the agreement with the duration of the retention period", he explained. Thirdly, the data collected would not be used for the US CAPPS II System. This system includes procedures under which passenger data are transferred to the US before travellers actually board a flight. Fourthly, the US had finally accepted, after having refused this earlier, a safeguard in the form of a joint review to be carried out with the EU authorities at least every year. Lastly, the US would now be ready to recognise the right of EU data protection authorities to represent any European passengers whose complaints to the Department of Homeland Security have not been satisfactorily resolved.

Referring to the last time he appeared before the committee on 1 December, promising to tackle the delicate issue of ”purpose limitation” with US authorities, Commissioner Bolkestein confirmed that the US authorities had agreed to use the data only in connection with "terrorism and related crimes" and "other serious crimes, including organised crime, of a transnational nature". "Domestic crimes are thus excluded", he explained.

According to Transport Commissioner Loyola DE PALACIO, "the key words which underpin this agreement are 'proportionality' and 'balance' ". She emphasised that a "push system" where data would be directly available from a centralised system, would be more cost effective than the current "pull system", which requires airlines to hand over the data themselves. For his part, Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Antonio VITORINO argued that the EU needed to develop the use of PNR and travellers’ data irrespective of this agreement. "At EU level, we are at an early stage in developing a policy in this area", he said. According to External Relations Commissioner Chris PATTEN, the negotiations had been "exceptionally tough". He believed it was a positive step for the US to consult the EU "at the policy-making stage".

However, several MEPs voiced sharp criticism, questioning above all the compatibility of the agreement with current EU law. "At the moment, we are still in an illegal situation", said rapporteur Johanna BOOGERD-QUAAK (ELDR, NL). "We have repeatedly asked for negotiations to be based on our policies, but how do you fit that policy with the result of this negotiation?" she asked. According to Kathalijne BUITENWEG (Greens/EFA, NL), the three and a half year storage period was "disproportionately long". "The Commission is well aware that it is breaking the law but I assume that Member States will defend it for the reciprocity we're being offered", she said. "We can't break an EU law simply because everyone wants to!" she added. Marco CAPPATO (IND, I) shared this view, believing the data would be collected illegally. "Laws are to be obeyed and not to be interpreted politically", he said.

Hubert PIRKER (EPP-ED, A), while acknowledging that "some progress has been made" expressed concern about the number of information fields for which data would be collected. "Do these 34 types all serve the need of combating terrorism?" he questioned. "And who would have access to this data?" he asked. In the view of Elmar BROK (EPP-ED, D), the practical differences for EU citizens entailed by this arrangement must be established, and this was aside from reflecting on its effect on transatlantic relations. Raising the principle of reciprocity, Timothy KIRKHOPE (EPP-ED, UK) questioned whether the EU would derive any benefit from the data it would be entitled to receive. "How best can we make use of this information, if we want to use it at all?" he asked.

On the other hand, several MEPs congratulated the Commission for the results it had achieved. For Georg JAREZEMBOWSKI (EPP-ED, D), no law would be broken if passengers agreed in advance to provide their data. "What we have here is a step forward", he said. Jacqueline FOSTER (EPP-ED, UK) wondered what debate the committee would be having "if one of our countries had been attacked instead of the US on 11 September". Finally, James NICHOLSON (EPP-ED, UK) reminded MEPs that "when you enter negotiations, you don't win every point".

16.12.2003 Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs
       In the chair: Jorge Salvador HERNANDEZ MOLLAR (EPP-ED, E)

Press enquiries:
Danny de Paepe - tel. Brussels (32-2) 28 42531 Strasbourg (33-3) 881 73605
e-mail: libe-press@europarl.eu.int
Joelle Fiss - tel. Brussels (32-2) 28 41075 Strasbourg (33-3) 881 73840
e-mail: foreign-press@europarl.eu.int

The Budgetary Control Committee has decided to recommend granting discharge to the Committee of the Regions for the budget year 2001. Parliament had postponed granting discharge in April, as there were a number of serious concerns, among other things over the reimbursement of expenses to Members of the Committee of the Regions and over tendering procedures.

Voting on a report by Maria AVILÉS PEREA (EPP-ED, E) on Monday evening, MEPs welcomed the corrective measures taken by the Committee of the Regions since then and the commitments made by its new secretary-general to improve financial management and control. The report will be put to the vote by the full Parliament at its January session in Brussels.

15.12.2003 Committee on Budgetary Control
       In the chair: Herbert Bösch (PES, A)
       Procedure: Budgetary discharge
       Plenary vote: January II, Brussels

Press enquiries:
Marjory van den Broeke - tel. Brussels (32-2) 28 44304, Strasbourg (33-3) 881 74838
e-mail: cont-press@europarl.eu.int