German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/209,
pp. 26349-26350.
Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.
In digital policy matters, the Federal government can be
reproached for many failings, yet surely not for one; namely, that it has no
strategy. Cyber security strategy, digital strategy, mobile phone strategy,
broadband strategy, AI strategy, high tech strategy, and now the data strategy,
all with multi-colored brochures, pretty internet sites. Ja, though with verbiage and marketing alone no state is made,
neither an analog nor a digital.
Thus draft laws for the implementation of the strategies
rain down upon us, will be winked through the parliament here, and then as
before be sluggishly implemented. The IT security law comes at least a year too late and delivers
more questions than answers. The digital pact school, the on-line access law,
or the digitalization administration have hand-made defects. Yet not only the
administrative courts have long since come to terms with the quality of so many
of the products which this sovereign house has left in the lurch. Strategies
for broadband construction and an adequate maintenance of mobile phones were
set in sand; even developing countries were better here. Now Corona must come
and draw the German cart out of the mud.
Yet now the really big throw: The Federal government’s data
strategy, already announced by Chancellery Minister Braun in January 2020. The
implementation should result in the current legislative period. Minister Braun
was proud of the ambitious schedule. Dr. Helge Braun was already, ja, proud of his management ability as
the “refugee crisis terminator” – so the “Giessner
Presse” named him at the time. And surely his failed Corona warning app
also filled him with pride. And it is now more than questionable what of the
data strategy, which will have been so slowly proclaimed, will be implemented
by the end of his service time.
All in all: That everything is drawn out and drawn along is
a trademark of this Federal government. That is so much more regrettable,
ladies and gentlemen, when the data strategy put forward actually contains some
important points. Thoughtful citizens always start up when it is about the
gathering and use of personal data. It has here proven to be a giant area of
tension. One side attracts the potential of data usage, on the other side is
the danger of misuse and the citizens’ perception of how politics masters this
balance. Here certainly is now to be expected a higher legal standard, indeed
for the user as well as for the digital economy. At least, that is the plan.
And the promotion of research and certification projects for data trustees and
systems of anonymity are sensible and important.
Why, however, in Germany criteria for an unbureaucratic
process for data trustees just today begin to be implemented, dear Federal
government, is your secret. Since data protection and IT security are no
hindrance for a functioning data society but are its basis. We also ought to be
anxious as to whether you adhere to your announcement to allow no additional
bureaucratic monsters. Since when you can do a really good one, then it is, ja, just one official, just one
commission to create and just one more decision level to fit in.
What we lack in the digital strategy concept is a
transparent presentation of the timely and technical dependencies of the
specified measures. A continual and transparent progress report is required for
an efficient implementation of the strategy. Yet transparency is as you know, ja, not your thing. You master perfectly
the ramification of the decision process. We know that also in the competence
jumble of your Digital Agenda where too the principle commands: If thou wishes
to conceal, then tangle and maximize the number of associated intersections.
Besides that, we would have wished that the data strategy
entered more comprehensively into the specifics in connection with the market
dominant firms. Here, concrete requirements are lacking. The reference to the
amendment of the laws restricting competition is not sufficient.
An essential danger consists of the abusive use of data,
primarily by non-European states. Germany and Europe can bring forward a more
regulated and open access to data. The seizure of data however must be
prevented. The AfD was the first to here address this in the case of China relative
to Huawei.
We also have a big bellyache with the planned standard
platform for analysis of open source data. For example, social media data shall
be used so as to
process and, by use of non-state actors, to generate international, qualitatively high value data on foreign policy relevant topics…and to place it at the disposal of the Federal government
Cited from the submitted instruction. – Here, the door to
abuse is opened, since this formulation leaves everything open. Only one
government is envisaged which makes use of the data of its citizens so it might
be used for its own purposes of political power – domestic and foreign. Yet,
ladies and gentlemen, why concern ourselves? This is all, ja, only wicked ulterior motives which one can have here,
conspiracy theories, fiction – like what appears only in dystopian novels.
Saskia Esken (SPD): The AfD’s black lists.
I come to a conclusion. All in all, the Federal government’s
data strategy is an important and correct start. It pushes a long overdue
development process, a process which in other countries was already long since
initiated. That is to say, we require full steam ahead. For that, the submitted
strategy is by far not ambitious enough. What is generally lacking is a
superimposed vision, and indeed a vision therein of how we can place data at
the service of society, economy and state, yet also thereby make possible a
secure use. This primarily for the defense of the private sphere of our
citizens, defended from the misuse of politicians who are ready to cancel our
hard won rights of freedom.
Many thanks.
[trans: tem]
