EU's Israel data transfer deal to proceed despite Irish veto

PanchoVilla

This was originally posted in the conspiracy theories forum but I think it's appropriate to post it here as well. Credit goes to Brown Bomber for catching this one.

AN EU deal to allow the transfer to Israel of sensitive personal data on European citizens is set to go ahead after Irish attempts to block the initiative ran aground.

Angry at the use of fake Irish passports by the alleged Israeli assassins of a senior Hamas operative, Dublin tried to block moves to declare that the EU recognises Israeli data protection standards as being sufficient to allow member states to transfer personal data there.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/1112/1224283152213.html

This is disgraceful to be honest. My personal opinion is that Israel is a terrorist state and the EU should offer no cooperation until it is guaranteed that Israel will not conduct assassinations in foreign countries. Mossad has already assassinated a senior Hamas official using fake Irish passports and this deal will make it much easier for Israel to do the same in the future. I think Ireland should seriously consider it's membership of the EU in light of this. I wonder if I can revoke my EU citizenship and still live in Ireland.

dlofnep

Ah yes - the EU, a bastion of democracy. This move is a disgrace, and I remember the original proposals well. Brussels should be ashamed of itself.

Scofflaw

There was no Irish veto - Ireland was not supported by other countries in its position.

“We were not satisfied and are still not satisfied that Israel meets the necessary criteria. We pushed it to a vote but were the only country to oppose the go-ahead,” said a spokesman for Mr Ahern.

I'm opposed to the move, but it's not a case of Ireland being overruled or an Irish "veto" being set aside. Democracy doesn't consist of Ireland getting its way all the time, even when, as here, I'd prefer it had.

cordially,
Scofflaw

meglome

dlofnep wrote: »

Ah yes - the EU, a bastion of democracy. This move is a disgrace, and I remember the original proposals well. Brussels should be ashamed of itself.

Generally I'm a big supporter of the EU but not in this case. I just hope this thread doesn't end up being a generic anti-EU rant.

Nodin

meglome wrote: »

Generally I'm a big supporter of the EU but not in this case. I just hope this thread doesn't end up being a generic anti-EU rant.

Its an odd thing, because the EU frequently talks a good fight re the Occupied territories, but then goes and "normalises" various kinds of relations with Israel unconditionally.

BlaasForRafa

meglome wrote: »

Generally I'm a big supporter of the EU but not in this case. I just hope this thread doesn't end up being a generic anti-EU rant.

Nah, it'll end up as a generic anti-Israel rant

meglome

Nodin wrote: »

Its an odd thing, because the EU frequently talks a good fight re the Occupied territories, but then goes and "normalises" various kinds of relations with Israel unconditionally.

I find it odd as well. Don't have an explanation as to why it went through though.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Nah, it'll end up as a generic anti-Israel rant

hehe yeah that is more likely.

Coyler

Nodin wrote: »

Its an odd thing, because the EU frequently talks a good fight re the Occupied territories, but then goes and "normalises" various kinds of relations with Israel unconditionally.

Before responding, I'd like to make it clear, up front, I don't like this. That said..

Nothing particularly odd about it. Some people within the EU talk a good game but that doesn't mean its official EU policy. Rubber only meets road once the issues hits the EU Council and either the Member States leaders or foreign ministers arrive at a policy. Of course there is the High Representative, Catherine Ashton, but she will still have policy dictated to her by the Council.

So the question is why doesn't the Council take a harder line with Israel. Well its because there are Members who don't want to, plain and simple. You can decide for yourself if its because they support the Israeli policies or they don't want to be seen as critical to the Jewish people. Whatever the reason its perfectly within the democratic right of those countries to take that stance.

Ireland was the only Member State that opposed this development and we pushed it to a vote. To suggest that we had a veto overruled is clearly false along with suggestions that it was undemocratic. Reading a little further it seems we did manage to get a concession though;

However, the Government has said the EU accepted Ireland’s demand for information manually processed by Israel to be monitored in the new arrangements. This usually concerns passport information recorded manually or photocopied at border points.

Although Israel still resists such monitoring, Ireland argued that EU and Israeli data protection officials want manual records included in Israel’s data protection legislation.

“We were not satisfied and are still not satisfied that Israel meets the necessary criteria. We pushed it to a vote but were the only country to oppose the go-ahead,” said a spokesman for Mr Ahern.

“It is now effectively a done deal, although we take some comfort from the fact that we were able to build into the process the monitoring requirement or an oversight mechanism.

So if I'm to understand this properly, Israel must alter its data protection laws in order for the deal to take place, something Israel government opposes. The article doesn't make this at all clear so shoot down my analysis, by all means. Perhaps a question to the TalktoEU people is in order.

PanchoVilla

Scofflaw wrote: »

There was no Irish veto - Ireland was not supported by other countries in its position.



I'm opposed to the move, but it's not a case of Ireland being overruled or an Irish "veto" being set aside. Democracy doesn't consist of Ireland getting its way all the time, even when, as here, I'd prefer it had.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The EU committee gave no opinion on the matter, in effect giving Israel the go-ahead. Because some member states were not represented at the meeting, there was no qualified majority in favour of the proposal. The European Commission adopts such decisions and is expected to do so in the coming weeks.

What democracy? It says some member states where not even present during the meeting. How many member states? Which ones? Why was a proposal voted on with some member states not even present? Seems more like a dictatorship than a democracy to me.

Scofflaw

PanchoVilla wrote: »

What democracy? It says some member states where not even present during the meeting. How many member states? Which ones? Why was a proposal voted on with some member states not even present? Seems more like a dictatorship than a democracy to me.

Member States wouldn't be present if they couldn't be bothered being there. For it to be dictatorship, we'll need a conspiracy theory that prevents some of the Member States being present, and we both know what will happen then.

cordially,
Scofflaw

PanchoVilla

Scofflaw wrote: »

Member States wouldn't be present if they couldn't be bothered being there. For it to be dictatorship, we'll need a conspiracy theory that prevents some of the Member States being present, and we both know what will happen then.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Someone in CT just brought up an interesting point. Data protection falls under Security and Justice in the Lisbon Treaty, which requires a unanimous vote in order to pass. Where's the unanimity if some member states didn't even vote and Ireland voted against it?

Edit: Here is a passage from a document titled "The Lisbon Treaty’s potential contribution to European strategy for globalisation". It details the extension of QMV to other areas of policy.

In the field of police and judicial cooperation, immigration and administrative cooperation: administrative cooperation in the area of freedom, security and justice; border controls (except passports, identity documents and residence permits);

http://www.euromonde2015.eu/IMG/pdf/annexe6_en.pdf


So from what I can understand from that, data sharing which includes passports, identity documents, and residence permits is not subject to the QMV but to a unanimous vote.

namloc1980

PanchoVilla wrote: »

Someone in CT just brought up an interesting point. Data protection falls under Security and Justice in the Lisbon Treaty, which requires a unanimous vote in order to pass. Where's the unanimity if some member states didn't even vote and Ireland voted against it?

Edit: Here is a passage from a document titled "The Lisbon Treaty’s potential contribution to European strategy for globalisation". It details the extension of QMV to other areas of policy.



http://www.euromonde2015.eu/IMG/pdf/annexe6_en.pdf


So from what I can understand from that, data sharing which includes passports, identity documents, and residence permits is not subject to the QMV but to a unanimous vote.

When the Data Protection Directive was brought into force in 1995 by a unanimous decision of the Council, they gave the decision as to which countries could be included in the "fast-track" for data transfer to the Commission and an associated Committee who could decide by QMV. At the time in 1995 it was probably a minor issue in the overall context of the Directive and obviously did not take account of the situation that has since developed. While I don't agree with Israel getting onto this "fast-track" list people must remember that data transfers can, and do, happen even now to many countries outside the EU. What this just means is that there will be less paperwork for Israeli requests. Also remember that the Israelis can't just obtain information unilaterally, they must still present a reasonable case to the Data Protection Offices in the various EU states as to why certain info is required.

Scofflaw

...which brings me back to the point I made earlier earlier, which is that this is beginning to look like CT dressed up as Politics, because it involves believing that unanimous votes aren't really unanimous, but are in fact controlled in some other way, where Member States are somehow mysteriously excluded.

Care to explain yourself, PanchoVilla? Make it good, too, because I already have a couple of other Mods wondering are you demonspawn, and this kind of CT dressed up as Politics looks right up demonspawn's street.

moderately,
Scofflaw

humanji

Scofflaw wrote: »

...which brings me back to the point I made earlier earlier, which is that this is beginning to look like CT dressed up as Politics, because it involves believing that unanimous votes aren't really unanimous, but are in fact controlled in some other way, where Member States are somehow mysteriously excluded.

Care to explain yourself, PanchoVilla? Make it good, too, because I already have a couple of other Mods wondering are you demonspawn, and this kind of CT dressed up as Politics looks right up demonspawn's street.

moderately,
Scofflaw

In his defence, I kind of brought the idea of asking this here, over in CT. Although we were looking at the conspiracy side of it, it is also covered in politics.

What we were wondering was if the deal to proceed is invalid as it would need a unanimous vote, depending on what info is being passed (as PanchoVilla linked to says that for passports, identity documents, and residence permits a unanimous vote is still needed)?

I'm not sure if there's even been a list of what sort of data is actually going to be passed on (it just seems to be titled "personal data"), and so the question came up as to whether or not this deal covers all personal data?

namloc1980

On further reading, when the Data Protection Directive was brought into force in 1995 the EU was operating under the Maastricht Treaty with the 3 Pillar structure: the EC, Common Foreign and Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs. The Data Protection Directive was only applicable to the 1st Pillar: the EC:

Data Protection Directive wrote:

Article 3.2

This Directive shall not apply to the processing of personal data:

- in the course of an activity which falls outside the scope of Community law, such as those provided for by Titles V (CFSP) and VI (JHA) of the Treaty on European Union and in any case to processing operations concerning public security, defence, State security (including the economic well-being of the State when the processing operation relates to State security matters) and the activities of the State in areas of criminal law.

Charles the Hammer

The irony with Ireland's attitude towards Israel, is that whilst Ireland obsesses over the tiny state and leads worldwide calls for boycotts etc, the Irish economy is in the toilet whilst the Israeli economy is thriving. Not only that, but the 'palestinian' economy is more successful than the Irish.

So whilst Ireland goes around cap-in-hand begging the EU for coin, the Israelis are looking at almost 4% growth rate.

Outside of the US, Israel is the first country that Intel opened up a major base in. Now they're producing the chips you all use to power your computers and bash away at your keyboards about Israel.

My advice is first of all, people in glass houses...... - secondly, I would say take care of your own internationally embarrassing mess instead of obsessing over a country the size of Wales.

humanji

Charles the Hammer wrote: »

The irony with Ireland's attitude towards Israel, is that whilst Ireland obsesses over the tiny state and leads worldwide calls for boycotts etc, the Irish economy is in the toilet whilst the Israeli economy is thriving. Not only that, but the 'palestinian' economy is more successful than the Irish.

So whilst Ireland goes around cap-in-hand begging the EU for coin, the Israelis are looking at almost 4% growth rate.

Outside of the US, Israel is the first country that Intel opened up a major base in. Now they're producing the chips you all use to power your computers and bash away at your keyboards about Israel.

My advice is first of all, people in glass houses...... - secondly, I would say take care of your own internationally embarrassing mess instead of obsessing over a country the size of Wales.

Economics has nothing to do with this issue. It's peoples personal details being given to a country that has already abused the trust of this nation. They're completely unrelated.

dlofnep

Charles the Hammer wrote: »

The irony with Ireland's attitude towards Israel, is that whilst Ireland obsesses over the tiny state and leads worldwide calls for boycotts etc, the Irish economy is in the toilet whilst the Israeli economy is thriving. Not only that, but the 'palestinian' economy is more successful than the Irish.

So whilst Ireland goes around cap-in-hand begging the EU for coin, the Israelis are looking at almost 4% growth rate.

Outside of the US, Israel is the first country that Intel opened up a major base in. Now they're producing the chips you all use to power your computers and bash away at your keyboards about Israel.

My advice is first of all, people in glass houses...... - secondly, I would say take care of your own internationally embarrassing mess instead of obsessing over a country the size of Wales.

Ah look - an anonymous Israeli shill.

Intel operates out of Ireland too, btw.

Charles the Hammer

humanji wrote: »

Economics has nothing to do with this issue. It's peoples personal details being given to a country that has already abused the trust of this nation. They're completely unrelated.

I was talking about the wider obsession over Israel within Irish society and politics. A lot of energy that could have gone towards saving your economy rather than politically attacking Israel.

This information is consumer-related. It's not the DNA of Irish citizens. The Irish are against it purely because it's Israel.

Doesn't seem to have thwarted anything though. Ireland has no clout now that it's bankrupt.

Israel has recently found massive reserves of gas off its coast. Reportedly twice the size of North sea gas.

Israel could become an exporter to Europe. Hey, they might even let you lot have some if you promise to be nice.

---

dlofnep: - Israel was the first country that Intel opened offices back in the 70's. That's where the Pentium chip was designed. In Israel.

Your Intel will just be a sales centre. Probably will up and leave soon, given the dire situation in your country.

'Palestinian' growth was almost 8% back in 2008. Took a tumble to 5%, not bad though. Their economy is doing better than some of the Oil rich Arab nations and life expectancy in Gaza is higher than soon to be 'European' Turkey.


Good news all round. Keep up with the boycotts lads, I think they're having the opposite effect, don't you?

humanji

Seriously, you're trying to cloud the issue. As I said, Israel betrayed Ireland's trust and now is expecting to get free access to peoples personal details.

You may want to turn this into some sort of racist rant, but it isn't. It's simply about making countries accountable for their actions, and making sure we don't compromise out citizens in the process.

dlofnep

Charles the Hammer wrote: »

dlofnep: - Israel was the first country that Intel opened offices back in the 70's. That's where the Pentium chip was designed. In Israel.

The microprocessor was developed by Federico Faggin (an Italian).

You missed the point of the OP btw. It's nothing to do with economics. It's to do with trust & Israel, given their recent role with Irish passports.

oscarBravo

Charles the Hammer, post on-topic or don't post. The topic has nothing to do with the relative strengths of the Irish and Israeli economies.

namloc1980

humanji wrote: »

Seriously, you're trying to cloud the issue. As I said, Israel betrayed Ireland's trust and now is expecting to get free access to peoples personal details.

You may want to turn this into some sort of racist rant, but it isn't. It's simply about making countries accountable for their actions, and making sure we don't compromise out citizens in the process.

The Data Protection Directive is not about giving anyone free access to personal data. And as pointed out the Directive does not apply to Justice and Home Affairs. These data transfers happen already, the only difference is that there will be less paperwork for Israeli requests, but it appears that has been lost in the fog of this issue.

Lab_Mouse

Scofflaw wrote: »

Make it good, too, because I already have a couple of other Mods wondering are you demonspawn

Easily solved Scofflaw, just openly announce that you have joined the freemasons and see if pancho has a sh1t fit:D

purplepanda

Israel has more say in the power structure & polices of the EU than Ireland can ever hope to have, this is obvious when even the US usually follows Israeli wishes even to the detriment of international relations between the west & other nations.

At least the obvious has been confirmed so that everyone can draw their own conclusions about this state that continually ignores world opinion & countless UN resolutions.