Brussels has secret talks with US to sign away your rights

[cyberianpan]

New York Times , June 28
WASHINGTON — The United States and the European Union are nearing completion of an agreement allowing law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information — like credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet browsing habits — about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.

Negotiators, who have been meeting since February 2007, have largely agreed on draft language for 12 major issues central to a “binding international agreement,” the report said.

The Bush administration and the European Commission have not publicized their talks, but they referred to their progress in a little-noticed paragraph deep in a joint statement after a summit meeting between President Bush and European leaders in Slovenia this month.

Issued June 10, the statement declared that “the fight against transnational crime and terrorism requires the ability to share personal data for law enforcement,” and called for the creation of a “binding international agreement” to aid such transfers while also ensuring that citizens’ privacy is “fully” protected.
Sunday Times June 29

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said: “We can barely trust our own authorities with sensitive personal information. What redress will we have on the other side of the Atlantic if our details are lost or abused?”

The Foreign Office would make no comment yesterday and an EU spokesman declined to discuss the matter.

Stewart Baker, assistant secretary for policy at the US department of homeland security, said that the deal would make it easier for the US to obtain private information on individuals from banks, credit card firms and other companies in Britain and the EU.
He said many firms faced sanctions from the EU if they were deemed to have passed information to the US in breach of data protection laws. The deal would in effect give them greater protection from punishment in the future. It would apply to airline passengers and anyone whom the US government had legitimate authority to obtain information about, he added.

Barry Steinhardt, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, said: “Clearly it’s a broad exchange of data. It’s another example of the US drawing in the rest of the world to sacrifice its principles.

“The US is essentially asking the rest of the world to conform to our very limited notion of what’s private.

And the Brussels bureaucrats are selling us out ?

cYp

[moghroth]

Most likely this would be in direct contravention of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights !!

Perhaps this is a secret tactic to ensure our compliance with the euro elite vision under Lisbon.

[Helium Three]

Brussels has the power. We gave it to them.

Remind me again what treaty that was?

[geraghd]

New York Times , June 28
WASHINGTON — The United States and the European Union are nearing completion of an agreement allowing law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information — like credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet browsing habits — about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.

Negotiators, who have been meeting since February 2007, have largely agreed on draft language for 12 major issues central to a “binding international agreement,” the report said.

The Bush administration and the European Commission have not publicized their talks, but they referred to their progress in a little-noticed paragraph deep in a joint statement after a summit meeting between President Bush and European leaders in Slovenia this month.

Issued June 10, the statement declared that “the fight against transnational crime and terrorism requires the ability to share personal data for law enforcement,” and called for the creation of a “binding international agreement” to aid such transfers while also ensuring that citizens’ privacy is “fully” protected.
Sunday Times June 29

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said: “We can barely trust our own authorities with sensitive personal information. What redress will we have on the other side of the Atlantic if our details are lost or abused?”

The Foreign Office would make no comment yesterday and an EU spokesman declined to discuss the matter.

Stewart Baker, assistant secretary for policy at the US department of homeland security, said that the deal would make it easier for the US to obtain private information on individuals from banks, credit card firms and other companies in Britain and the EU.
He said many firms faced sanctions from the EU if they were deemed to have passed information to the US in breach of data protection laws. The deal would in effect give them greater protection from punishment in the future. It would apply to airline passengers and anyone whom the US government had legitimate authority to obtain information about, he added.

Barry Steinhardt, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, said: “Clearly it’s a broad exchange of data. It’s another example of the US drawing in the rest of the world to sacrifice its principles.

“The US is essentially asking the rest of the world to conform to our very limited notion of what’s private.

And the Brussels bureaucrats are selling us out ?

cYp

Which Brussels bureaucrats are selling us out exactly?

[cyberianpan]

Which Brussels bureaucrats are selling us out exactly?

That's actually a very good question, these talks have been going on in secret. After the NYT broke the story a senior US government official has confirmed them. The EU is refusing to comment., all we know is that the officials are connected with the commission. In the NYT story it says that the US officials are trying to do this in a way that doesn't require congressional approval. I'd like to find out if our Brussels officials are up to a similar game, to do that we'd need to know who they are...

cYp

[lostexpectation]

isnt' this information available currently in county by country bi-lateral agreements, will it really be worse if agreed at a eu level?

[geraghd]

Which Brussels bureaucrats are selling us out exactly?

That's actually a very good question, these talks have been going on in secret. After the NYT broke the story a senior US government official has confirmed them. The EU is refusing to comment., all we know is that the officials are connected with the commission. In the NYT story it says that the US officials are trying to do this in a way that doesn't require congressional approval. I'd like to find out if our Brussels officials are up to a similar game, to do that we'd need to know who they are...

cYp

But it is the Council who have final say on this, so if such an agreement is reached it would be our own elected politicians who would be selling us out?

[cyberianpan]

isnt' this information available currently in county by country bi-lateral agreements, will it really be worse if agreed at a eu level?

Then why have they been engaged in complicated negotiations for over a year ?

But it is the Council who have final say on this, so if such an agreement is reached it would be our own elected politicians who would be selling us out?

We don't know if the EC ever intended this to go to the Council. Also when you bring something that's a product of over a year's complicated negotiation to be approved there's immense pressure to approve it rather than go back to the drawing table. These negotiations should have been publicised in order to give us our say.

cYp

[NotDevsSon]

isnt' this information available currently in county by country bi-lateral agreements, will it really be worse if agreed at a eu level?

Then why have they been engaged in complicated negotiations for over a year ?

But it is the Council who have final say on this, so if such an agreement is reached it would be our own elected politicians who would be selling us out?

We don't know if the EC ever intended this to go to the Council. Also when you bring something that's a product of over a year's complicated negotiation to be approved there's immense pressure to approve it rather than go back to the drawing table. These negotiations should have been publicised in order to give us our say.

cYp

Do you ever read newspapers? The negotiations have been written about for months. All governments have been directly involved in the negotiations and the treaty once signed will have to be ratified by the Council. The issue has been discussed in the European Parliament and will be again. If Lisbon was in force parliament would have a direct say, and the Dail and Seanad would have an early briefing on the documentation and a role in it. It won't because we don't have Lisbon right now so the old procedures will apply, meaning that the Dail and Seanad will only receive the details after everyone else and will not be able to contribute.

[geraghd]

isnt' this information available currently in county by country bi-lateral agreements, will it really be worse if agreed at a eu level?

Then why have they been engaged in complicated negotiations for over a year ?

But it is the Council who have final say on this, so if such an agreement is reached it would be our own elected politicians who would be selling us out?

We don't know if the EC ever intended this to go to the Council. Also when you bring something that's a product of over a year's complicated negotiation to be approved there's immense pressure to approve it rather than go back to the drawing table. These negotiations should have been publicised in order to give us our say.

cYp

This surely has to go before the Council, and such negotiations whether carried out by EU civil servants or national civil servants are conducted in relative secrecy I would have thought.
The slant the opening thread takes to paint the EU as some sort of unusual bureaucratic monster ready to trample over our rights seems a tad misguided, even disingenuous or politically charged..