The draft report by Marju Lauristin (S&D, Estonia) on the protection of personal data in electronic communications is causing concern among certain MEPs in the EPP and ECR groups at the European Parliament.
The Liberals, Greens and United Left appear rather satisfied, judging by the positions taken by these different groups on 21 June.
This meeting constituted the first opportunity for MEPs at the civil liberties committee to discuss the draft report by Marju Lauristin, published the previous week (see EUROPE 11811). This text follows the Commission’s presentation of a legislative proposal to strengthen confidentiality in electronic communications, whilst allowing service providers to use the personal data of customers that have given their prior consent (see EUROPE 11700).
Overall, the draft by Marju Lauristin goes in the direction of the Commission proposal. It is based on the extension of the regulation’s scope to electronic communication services, whilst adding, “machine to machine communications” to it “when they are connected to users”. It also seeks to compel all software to provide “default” private life protection settings (Article 10) and, in this sense, is opposed to the use of “windows” and “banners” for accepting cookies.
Marju Lauristin was supported at the civil liberties committee by the left, United Left, Greens and Liberals. The Christian Democrats and Conservatives criticise these provisions. The majority of groups (with the exception of ALDE) expressed criticism, however, of the amendments relating to article 11 (limitations and restrictions to confidentiality).
Examination of positions
Daniel Dalton (ECR, United Kingdom) said that he had serious concerns about the Commission proposal and even more on the draft report. He said that he was opposed because this text went against the general regulation and charter of fundamental rights (covering machine to machine communications). He said that he was also opposed to the provisions on cookies and said that requesting consent every six months would lead to complacency and undermine the measure as well as have consequences on prices.
The EPP also has misgivings as borne out by the contributions made by Axel Voss (Germany) and Michal Boni (Poland). The former said that, “the Commission proposal was already, in my opinion, rather retrograde. I do not understand why we need a lex specialis; the general rule on data protection is sufficient” Axel Voss.
More positive reactions from the left and centre, however, were not exempt from remarks. Jan Philipp Albrecht (Greens/EFA, Germany) suggested that the European Parliament legal service examined the link between the general regulation on data protection and the draft being examined, as well as the references to the general regulation in the second regulation. He also took a position in favour of obtaining the consent of the user in the event of there being a listening measure.
The Commission expressed its misgivings about default confidentiality for browsers.
Draft report: http://urlz.fr/5roo (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)