Activities of Marie-Christine VERGIAT related to 2015/2147(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Towards a Digital Single Market Act (A8-0371/2015 - Kaja Kallas, Evelyne Gebhardt) FR
Amendments (13)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the need for compliance with data protection legislation of all initiatives developed under the Digital Single Market Strategy; underlines the fact that respect for fundamental rights and data protection are key elements in building citizens’ trust and security, which are necessary for a balanced approach allowing the development of the economy and should thus be considered as creating opportunities and a competitive advantage;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for measures to tackle illegal content on the internet that will be in compliance with the rule of law and fundamental rights, in particular the right to freedom of expression and information, and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial; considers that, in order to achieve that goal, it is necessary to provide appropriate law enforcement tools, to support public- private partnerships and cooperation, to consider the role of intermediaries and to promote education and awareness-raising campaigns;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Urges the Commission and Member States not to undermine the rule of law, legal certainty, and freedom of expression by encouraging or coercing intermediaries to interfere arbitrarily with online communications for public policy goals;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Stresses that the removal of websites and the deletion of content on the internet should be based on judicial authorisation;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Considers that the mass surveillance of electronic communications by intelligence agencies both in Europe and the U.S. has severely damaged citizens' trust in the safety and security of digital services;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Underlines that the unrestricted possibility for citizens to use strong encryption in electronic communications is indispensable for the right to privacy.
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that the fast-growing number of attacks on networks and acts of cybercrime calls for a harmonised EU response with a view to ensuring a high level of cybersecurity of IT systems; believes that providing security on the internet means protecting networks and critical infrastructure, the ability of law enforcement agencies to fight criminality, including terrorism, radicalisation and child pornography, and the use of the necessary data to fight crime online and offline; believes that this requires a ban on backdoors in software and to ostracise the use of zero day exploits and to promote the widespread deployment of encryption and independent auditing; stresses that security, thus defined, is necessary to reinforce trust in digital services and the processing of personal data;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that big data, cloud services, the Internet of Things, research and innovation are key to economic development; believes that data protection safeguards andcompliance with data protection legislation and the use of state of the art IT security are crucial for building trust in the data-driven economy sector; stresses the need to raise awareness of the role of data and data- sharing in the economy and to clarify data ownership rulesat the essence of data protection is control over personal data and that the generation of new personal data through profiling is one of the biggest challenges for privacy and trust in the digital economy; underlines the role ofat personalisation of services and products that should be developed as a balanced solution in compliance with data protection requirements; calls for the promotion of privacy by default and by design; underlines the importance of a risk-based approach in ddopting the General Data pProtection lRegisulation, especially for SME by the end of 2015, both in the interest of data subjects and businesses;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that any processing of personal data through solutions based on interoperability, i.e. operated by the ISA² programme, must comply with the requirements of EU data protection laws; calls for common open standards to be developed for the data-driven economy, which should includprioritize security, respect for privacy and data protection;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Emphasises the importance of data protection as a fundamental right, and more precisely the purpose limitation principle, in any e-government action plan that includes 'once only principles'; is concerned that a widespread adoption of 'once only principles' could make it easier for member state governments to process personal data for other purposes, including profiling of citizens without their explicit consent using the existing public interest exception in European data protection law;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Emphasises that an e-government action plan relying on 'once only principles' for increased efficiency and cost reduction in the public sector should also consider the potential increase in the cost of protecting personal data in the systems infrastructure needed to support 'once only', and the implications of 'once only' for the new privacy and security by design requirements in the proposed General Data Protection Regulation;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for steps to be taken to ensure high standards of data protection providing for a level essentially equivalent to European data protection legislation when pursuing cooperation with the third countries within the Digital Single Market Strategy.
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Welcomes the ruling of the ECJ of 6 October 2015 in its case C-362/14 where the court has invalidated the Safe Harbour decision;