Question by Sarah Ludford to the Council on Counter-terrorism strategy. December 2006 plenary
The European Council adopted an EU counter-terrorism strategy in November 2005. Neither this nor the action plans on terrorism have been the subject of consultation with the European Parliament, despite our repeated requests. The counter-terrorism strategy nonetheless has a section entitled 'democratic accountability', promising a high-level political dialogue on counter-terrorism involving the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission once per Presidency, 'to ensure inter-institutional governance'.
Does the Presidency believe that a last-minute invitation to the chairman of the European Parliament's Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee to attend the May 2006 High Level Dialogue meeting fulfilled the commitment of a true dialogue, real democratic accountability and effective 'inter-institutional governance' in this vital area of EU activity?
Answer by Finnish Minister (translation not yet available)
Sarah Ludford's supplementary question
Thank you, Minister, but the fact is that second meeting did not take place, so one has to question the priority. And to have the chairman of the committee at just one meeting in one year is really not very stunning.
We as the Parliament were not involved in the drawing up of this counter-terrorism strategy or in the action planned, despite repeated requests. You were having discussions - we had a debate earlier this afternoon about the Automated Targeting System, which you knew about in September 2005, although you did not tell us. If there really is a commitment to keep us informed of all important developments in the field of counter-terrorism, why did we not know about that? Why are we not involved in all the discussions with the United States on security and privacy? I beg to differ on your commitment to this dialogue.
Follow the party's activity on...