Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-25-Speech-2-298"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2005-10-25"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Võitlus organiseeritud kuritegevusega⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051025.23.2-298"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-10-25-Speech-2-299⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Bill Newton Dunn⁶
lpv:spoken text	". – Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² unknown; Liberal Democrat Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² substitute; LIBE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)²² substitute; CONT (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)²² member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)²² member; IMCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²²
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@cs¹ "Hr. formand, jeg vil gerne takke kommissæren for hans meget positive og nyttige tale. Jeg tror, jeg taler for Udvalget om Borgernes Rettigheder og Retlige og Indre Anliggender, når jeg siger, at vi støtter ham i hans arbejde. Vi ønsker at presse lidt mere på, men vi ønsker alle at bekæmpe organiseret kriminalitet så effektivt og så hurtigt, som vi overhovedet kan. Vi tilslutter os Deres forslag, hr. kommissær, og vi vil fortsat lægge stort pres på Dem for at opnå fortsatte fremskridt, hvis vi kan. Jeg taler på udvalgets vegne i min egenskab af ordfører, ikke som privatperson. Vi anbefaler fuld støtte til Kommissionens forslag, men som kommissæren sagde, er der nogle supplerende punkter, som vi har foreslået bliver tilføjet. Vi ønsker at styrke Europol, men vi ønsker at gøre det til et EU-agentur. Jeg håber, at kollegerne kan tilslutte sig ændringsforslag 45 fremsat af Den Socialdemokratiske Gruppe, der henviser til, at der ikke kan ske yderligere stramninger, før det er et egentligt EU-agentur. Så kan vi give det vores uforbeholdne støtte. Vi ønsker at konfiskere indtægterne fra organiseret kriminalitet. Der er et punkt, som kommissæren ikke har nævnt, nemlig at udvalget ønsker at påpege - og vi stemte for dette - at der er et presserende behov for at oprette en fælles politistyrke for EU, eftersom organiseret kriminalitet overskrider grænserne, mens håndhævelse af loven er op til de enkelte medlemsstater og ikke kan overskride grænserne. Vi siger ikke, at "den skal oprettes", men at der er et presserende behov. Vi må overveje det, uanset hvor politisk kontroversielt dette måtte være. Jeg vil gerne takke kommissæren for hans udtalelser om et centralt kontor i de enkelte medlemsstater. Det er nødvendigt for at koordinere de enkelte medlemsstaters ofte fragmenterede indsats. Han nævnte ikke tanken om et kontor for beslaglæggelse af aktiver i stil med det irske system i Dublin, således at regeringskontoret rent faktisk kan konfiskere mistænkte kriminelles aktiver og efterfølgende give dem tilbage til dem, hvis de viser sig ikke at være skyldige. Kriminelle udfører deres handlinger for at tjene penge, og hvis man tager deres aktiver fra dem, bliver de meget chokerede. Sådan rammer man dem hårdest. Vi som udvalg ønsker, at der oprettes et kontor for beslaglæggelse af aktiver i hver af de 25 medlemsstater, så vi rigtig kan ramme de kriminelle der, hvor det gør mest ondt. Udvalget støtter Kommissionens forslag fuldt ud, men vi ønsker at gå endnu længere og endnu hurtigere. Jeg mener, at Parlamentet og Kommissionen er allierede i dette spørgsmål. Det egentlige problem - og jeg er ked af at se, at Rådets pladser som sædvanlig er tomme - er at få Rådet til at gennemføre og ratificere de ting, det siger, det vil. F.eks. er ingen af de tidligere protokoller om styrkelse af Europol blevet ratificeret af samtlige medlemsstater. Europol er fortsat meget svagere, end det burde være. Vi støtter Kommissionen, og vi ser meget gerne, at Rådet arbejder lidt hurtigere."@da² ". Herr Präsident! Ich danke dem Kommissar für seinen sehr positiven und hilfreichen Beitrag. Ich glaube, ich spreche im Namen des Ausschusses für bürgerliche Freiheiten, Justiz und Inneres, wenn ich sage, dass wir ihn in seinem Tun unterstützen. Wir wollen weiter vorankommen, aber wir alle wollen die organisierte Kriminalität so effektiv und so schnell bekämpfen, wie es uns möglich ist. Deshalb unterstützen wir Sie, Herr Kommissar, bei dem, was sie vorschlagen, und wir werden Sie nach Möglichkeit auch künftig unter Druck setzen, um weitere Fortschritte zu erzielen. Ich spreche als Berichterstatter für den Ausschuss und nicht für mich selbst. Wir empfehlen, den Vorschlag der Kommission umfassend zu unterstützen. Doch, wie der Kommissar schon sagte, gibt es kleine Zusätze, die unserer Ansicht nach hinzugefügt werden sollten. Wir wollen Europol stärken, aber wir wollen die Behörde zu einer EU-Agentur ausbauen. Ich hoffe, dass die Kollegen den von der Sozialdemokratischen Fraktion im Europäischen Parlament vorgelegten Änderungsantrag 45 unterstützen können, in dem es heißt, dass erst dann eine weitere Stärkung erfolgen kann, wenn Europol eine ordnungsgemäße EU-Agentur ist. Dann können wir unsere uneingeschränkte Unterstützung anbieten. Wir wollen die Profite der organisierten Kriminalität konfiszieren. Einen Punkt hat der Kommissar nicht erwähnt: Da die organisierte Kriminalität Grenzen passiert, die Strafverfolgung jedoch Sache der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten ist und nicht grenzüberschreitend erfolgen kann, besteht nach Ansicht des Ausschusses die dringende Notwendigkeit, Polizeikräfte der Europäischen Union zu schaffen, und dafür haben wir auch gestimmt. Wir sagen nicht: „Schafft sie!“ Aber es besteht die dringende Notwendigkeit. Wir müssen uns damit auseinander setzen, ganz gleich, wie politisch kontrovers dies sein mag. Ich danke dem Kommissar dafür, dass er das Problem einer zentralen Stelle in jedem Mitgliedstaat angesprochen hat. Wir brauchen sie zur Koordinierung der oftmals zersplitterten Anstrengungen in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten. Nicht erwähnt hat er die Einrichtung einer Stelle für die Sicherstellung von Vermögenswerten nach dem irischen Vorbild in Dublin, die die Sicherstellung von Vermögenswerten von Verdächtigen durch eine staatliche Stelle ermöglicht. Bei erwiesener Unschuld werden die Vermögenswerte zurückgegeben. Da das Ziel der kriminellen Tätigkeit darin besteht, sich zu bereichern, geht die Sicherstellung entsprechender Vermögenswerte den Verbrechern an die Nieren. Damit trifft man sie an ihrer empfindlichsten Stelle. Wir als Ausschuss sind an der Einrichtung einer Stelle für die Sicherstellung von Vermögenswerten in jedem der 25 Mitgliedstaaten interessiert, um Straftäter in finanzieller Hinsicht empfindlich zu treffen. Der Vorschlag der Kommission hat die uneingeschränkte Unterstützung des Ausschusses, aber wir wollen mehr, und zwar schneller. Ich glaube, dass Parlament und Kommission in dieser Sache Verbündete sind. Das eigentliche Problem ist der Rat – und ich stelle mit Bedauern fest, dass die Sitze des Rates wie gewöhnlich leer sind –, der sich nicht an seine Zusagen bezüglich der Inkraftsetzung und Ratifizierung von Rechtsakten hält. So wurde beispielsweise keines der bisherigen Protokolle zur Stärkung von Europol von allen Mitgliedstaaten ratifiziert. Europol ist noch immer schwächer als es sein sollte. Wir unterstützen die Kommission und wünschen uns, dass der Rat an Tempo zulegt."@de⁹ "Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ τον Επίτροπο για την πολύ θετική και κατατοπιστική ομιλία του. Πιστεύω ότι εκφράζω την άποψη όλων των μελών της Επιτροπής Ελευθεριών και Δικαιωμάτων των Πολιτών, Δικαιοσύνης και Εσωτερικών Υποθέσεων λέγοντας ότι τον υποστηρίζουμε σε αυτό που κάνει. Θέλουμε να ασκήσουμε λίγο περισσότερη πίεση, αλλά όλοι θέλουμε να καταπολεμήσουμε το οργανωμένο έγκλημα όσο το δυνατόν αποτελεσματικότερα και ταχύτερα. Συνεπώς, σας υποστηρίζουμε, κύριε Επίτροπε, σε ό,τι προτείνετε και θα συνεχίσουμε να σας πιέζουμε έντονα να συνεχίσετε την πρόοδο, εάν μπορούμε. Μιλώ ως εισηγητής εκ μέρους της επιτροπής, όχι εμού προσωπικά. Συνιστούμε πλήρη υποστήριξη για την πρόταση της Επιτροπής αλλά, όπως είπε ο Επίτροπος, υπάρχουν επιπλέον λεπτομέρειες που προτείναμε να προστεθούν. Θέλουμε να ενισχύσουμε την Ευρωπόλ, αλλά θέλουμε να την καταστήσουμε οργανισμό της ΕΕ. Ελπίζω ότι οι συνάδελφοι μπορούν να υποστηρίξουν την τροπολογία 45 της Σοσιαλιστικής Ομάδας η οποία υποδεικνύει να μην υπάρξει επιπλέον ενίσχυση, έως ότου μετατραπεί σε πραγματικό οργανισμό της ΕΕ. Τότε μπορούμε να της δώσουμε απλόχερη στήριξη. Θέλουμε να κατάσχουμε τα κέρδη του οργανωμένου εγκλήματος. Υπάρχει ένα θέμα το οποίο δεν ανέφερε ο Επίτροπος: επειδή το οργανωμένο έγκλημα υπερβαίνει τα σύνορα, αλλά η επιβολή των νόμων εναπόκειται στα επιμέρους κράτη μέλη και δεν μπορεί να υπερβεί τα σύνορα, η επιτροπή θέλει να επισημάνει –και το υπερψηφίσαμε– ότι υπάρχει επιτακτική ανάγκη δημιουργίας μιας αστυνομικής δύναμης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Δεν λέμε «δημιουργήστε την», αλλά λέμε ότι υπάρχει επιτακτική ανάγκη. Πρέπει να το σκεφτούμε αυτό, όσο πολιτικά αμφιλεγόμενο και αν είναι. Ευχαριστώ τον Επίτροπο που μίλησε για μια συγκεντρωτική υπηρεσία στο πλαίσιο του κάθε κράτους μέλους. Το χρειαζόμαστε αυτό προκειμένου να συντονίσουμε τις συχνά αποσπασματικές προσπάθειες στα επιμέρους κράτη μέλη. Δεν ανέφερε την ιδέα μιας υπηρεσίας ανάκτησης περιουσιακών στοιχείων, κατά το πρότυπο του ιρλανδικού συστήματος στο Δουβλίνο μέσω του οποίου η κυβερνητική υπηρεσία μπορεί κατ’ ουσίαν να κατάσχει περιουσιακά στοιχεία ύποπτων εγκληματιών και, στη συνέχεια, να τα επιστρέψει εάν αποδειχτεί ότι δεν είναι ένοχοι. Επειδή οι εγκληματίες δρουν για να αποκτήσουν χρήματα, εάν κάποιος τους τα πάρει, εκνευρίζονται πολύ. Αυτός είναι ο καλύτερος τρόπος να τους πλήξουμε. Ως επιτροπή, θα θέλαμε να επιτύχουμε τη συγκρότηση μιας υπηρεσίας ανάκτησης περιουσιακών στοιχείων σε κάθε ένα από τα 25 κράτη μέλη για να χτυπήσουμε τους εγκληματίες εκεί που τους πονάει πιο πολύ. Η επιτροπή υποστηρίζει πλήρως την πρόταση της Επιτροπής, αλλά θέλουμε να προχωρήσουμε περισσότερο και γρηγορότερα. Πιστεύω ότι το Κοινοβούλιο και η Επιτροπή είναι σύμμαχοι σε αυτό. Το πραγματικό πρόβλημα –και με λύπη μου διαπιστώνω ότι τα έδρανα του Συμβουλίου, ως συνήθως, είναι άδεια– είναι να θέσει το Συμβούλιο σε ισχύ και να επικυρώσει τα πράγματα τα οποία λέει ότι θα κάνει. Επί παραδείγματι, κανένα από τα πρωτόκολλα που ενίσχυαν την Ευρωπόλ στο παρελθόν δεν έχει επικυρωθεί από όλα τα κράτη μέλη. Η Ευρωπόλ εξακολουθεί να είναι ασθενέστερη από ό,τι θα έπρεπε. Υποστηρίζουμε την Επιτροπή και θα επιθυμούσαμε διακαώς το Συμβούλιο να κινηθεί λίγο ταχύτερα."@el¹⁰ "Señor Presidente, doy las gracias al Comisario por esta intervención tan positiva y útil. Creo que puedo hablar en nombre de la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior, y decir que le apoyamos en lo que está haciendo. Queremos presionar un poco más, pero todos queremos luchar contra la delincuencia organizada de la forma más eficaz y rápida posible. Por lo tanto, le apoyamos, Comisario, en lo que se propone, y seguiremos presionándole al máximo para mantener el progreso, si podemos. Hablo en nombre de la comisión como ponente, no a título personal. Recomendamos el pleno apoyo a la propuesta de la Comisión, pero como ha dicho el Comisario, hay algunos puntos adicionales cuya inclusión hemos propuesto. Queremos reforzar Europol, pero queremos que sea una agencia de la UE. Espero que los colegas puedan apoyar la enmienda 45 del Grupo Socialista, donde se propone que no haya más refuerzos hasta que no sea una agencia de la UE propiamente dicha. Entonces podremos darle nuestro apoyo incondicional. Queremos confiscar los beneficios de la delincuencia organizada. Existe un punto que el Comisario no ha mencionado: dado que la delincuencia organizada cruza fronteras, pero la aplicación de la ley depende de cada uno de los Estados miembros y no puede cruzar fronteras, la comisión quiere señalar –y hemos votado a favor de ello– que existe una necesidad imperiosa de crear una fuerza policial de la Unión Europea. No estamos diciendo «créenla», sino que existe una necesidad imperiosa. Debemos pensar en ello, por muy controvertido que políticamente sea. Agradezco al Comisario que haya hablado de una agencia centralizada en cada Estado miembro. Necesitamos coordinar los esfuerzos a menudo fragmentados de cada Estado miembro. No ha mencionado la idea de una oficina para la recuperación de activos, siguiendo el modelo del sistema irlandés en Dublín, según el cual en la práctica un órgano gubernamental puede confiscar los activos de los presuntos delincuentes y posteriormente devolvérselos si se demuestra que no son culpables. Dado que los delincuentes actúan para ganar dinero, si se les quitan sus propiedades se ofenden mucho. Es la forma de atacarles la máxima contundencia. Nosotros, como comisión, quisiéramos que se creara una oficina de recuperación de activos en cada uno de los 25 Estados miembros para atacar realmente a los delincuentes allí donde más les duele. La comisión parlamentaria apoya plenamente la propuesta de la Comisión, pero queremos ir más lejos y más rápido. Creo que el Parlamento y la Comisión son aliados en esto. El problema real –y lamento comprobar que, como siempre, los bancos del Consejo están vacíos– es que el Consejo apruebe y ratifique las cosas que dice que hará. Por ejemplo, ninguno de los protocolos que reforzaban Europol en el pasado ha sido ratificado por todos los Estados miembros. Europol es aún mucho más débil de lo que debería ser. Apoyamos a la Comisión y nos gustaría muchísimo que el Consejo avanzara un poco más rápido."@es²⁰ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, kiitän arvoisaa komission jäsentä hänen erittäin myönteisestä ja hyödyllisestä puheenvuorostaan. Uskon voivani todeta kansalaisvapauksien sekä oikeus- ja sisäasioiden valiokunnan puolesta, että tuemme hänen toimintaansa. Haluamme painaa päälle hieman voimakkaammin, mutta haluamme kaikki torjua järjestäytynyttä rikollisuutta mahdollisimman tehokkaasti ja pikaisesti. Sen vuoksi tuemme teitä arvoisa komission jäsen ehdotuksessanne ja jatkamme mahdollisuuksiemme mukaan kovaa painostustamme, jotta asioita vietäisiin edelleenkin eteenpäin. Puhun valiokuntani puolesta esittelijänä, en oman itseni puolesta. Suosittelemme täyden tuen antamista komission ehdotukselle, mutta – kuten arvoisa komission jäsen totesi – olemme ehdottaneet siihen joitakin lisäyksiä. Haluamme vahvistaa Europolia, mutta haluamme tehdä siitä EU:n erillisviraston. Toivon, että kollegat voivat kannattaa sosiaalidemokraattisen ryhmän tekemää tarkistusta 45, jossa mainitaan, ettei vahvistamistoimia jatketa ennen kuin Europol on oikea EU:n erillisvirasto. Sen jälkeen voimme antaa sille täydellisen tukemme. Haluamme takavarikoida järjestäytyneen rikollisuuden tuotot. Komission jäsen jätti mainitsematta yhden seikan: koska järjestäytynyt rikollisuus levittäytyy yli rajojen mutta lainvalvonta on yksittäisten jäsenvaltioiden vastuulla eikä voi ulottua maan rajojen ylitse, valiokunta haluaa tähdentää – äänestimmekin tämän puolesta – että Euroopan unioniin on kiireellisesti perustettava poliisivoimat. Emme sano: "perustakaa se" vaan että siihen on pakottava tarve. Meidän on harkittava sitä, vaikka se saattaakin olla poliittisesti kiistanalainen kysymys. Kiitän arvoisaa komission jäsentä siitä, että hän mainitsi jokaiseen jäsenvaltioon perustettavan keskitetyn viraston. Tarvitsemme sitä koordinoimaan yksittäisten jäsenvaltioiden sisällä toteutettavia toimia, jotka ovat usein hajanaisia. Hän ei maininnut ajatusta omaisuuden palautusta käsittelevästä toimistosta, jollainen Dubliniin on perustettu Irlannin järjestelmän mukaisesti. Järjestelmän mukaan valtion virasto voi takavarikoida rikoksesta epäiltyjen varat ja palauttaa ne myöhemmin, jos heidän todistetaan olevan syyttömiä. Koska rikollisten toiminnan päämääränä on raha, he järkyttyvät pahan kerran, jos joku vie heidän varansa. Juuri tällä tavoin heille voidaan aiheuttaa eniten harmia. Valiokuntamme haluaisi nähdä omaisuuden palautusta käsittelevän toimiston perustettavan kaikkiin 25 jäsenvaltioon, jotta rikollisia voitaisiin todellakin iskeä niiden arimpaan paikkaan. Valiokuntamme antaa täyden tukensa komission ehdotukselle, mutta haluamme edetä pitemmälle ja nopeammin. Uskon, että parlamentti ja komissio ovat tässä asiassa liittolaisiamme. Todellinen ongelma – ja huomaan taas surukseni, että neuvoston penkit ovat tavalliseen tapaan tyhjinä – on siinä, miten neuvosto saadaan saattamaan voimaan ja ratifioimaan lupaamansa asiat. Esimerkiksi yhtäkään Europolia vahvistavaa aiempaa pöytäkirjaa ei ole ratifioitu kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa. Europol on yhä paljon heikompi kuin mitä sen pitäisi olla. Tuemme komissiota ja toivomme todellakin, että neuvosto olisi nopeampi liikkeissään."@fi⁷ "Monsieur le Président, je remercie le commissaire pour cette intervention très positive et utile. Je pense que je puis dire, au nom de la commission des libertés civiles, de la justice et des affaires intérieures, que nous soutenons les actions qu’il entreprend. Nous souhaitons, en ce qui nous concerne, agir avec un peu plus d’énergie, mais notre vœu à tous, c’est de lutter contre la criminalité organisée de la manière la plus efficace et la plus rapide possible. C’est la raison pour laquelle nous adhérons, Monsieur le Commissaire, à vos propositions et ne cesserons de vous encourager vivement à poursuivre dans cette voie, si nous le pouvons. Je m’exprime au nom de la commission en tant que rapporteur, non pas en mon propre nom. Nous recommandons un soutien inconditionnel à la proposition de la Commission, mais, comme le commissaire l’a déclaré, nous avons proposé d’ajouter quelques extras. Nous souhaitons renforcer Europol et en faire une agence européenne. J’espère que mes chers collègues souscriront à l’amendement 45 déposé par le groupe socialiste qui renvoie à un arrêt du renforcement jusqu’à ce qu’Europol devienne une agence européenne à part entière, ce que nous ne pouvons qu’applaudir des deux mains. Nous aspirons à confisquer les profits tirés de la criminalité organisée. Le commissaire s’est abstenu de tout commentaire sur un point: puisque la criminalité organisée fait fi des frontières, tandis que le respect de la loi est l’affaire de chaque État membre, dans le cadre de ses propres frontières, la commission tient à souligner - point en faveur duquel nous avons voté - qu’il devient urgent d’instituer une police de l’Union européenne. Nous ne disons pas «créez-la», mais nous affirmons qu’il devient urgent d’en créer une. Nous devons réfléchir à cette question, aussi controversée soit-elle sur le plan politique. Je sais gré au commissaire d’avoir parlé d’une agence centralisée au sein de chaque État membre. Elle s’impose si nous voulons que les efforts souvent fragmentés dans les divers États membres soient coordonnés. Il n’a pas évoqué la proposition de créer une unité pour le recouvrement des avoirs, calquée sur le modèle irlandais à Dublin, système par lequel une agence gouvernementale a en fait la possibilité de confisquer les biens de criminels potentiels et de les leur rendre ensuite s’ils sont acquittés. Puisque l’activité des criminels se résume à gagner de l’argent, ils seront très ennuyés si on leur confisque leurs avoirs. Telle est la manière la plus efficace de s’attaquer à ce type d’individu. Les membres de la commission souhaitent que chaque État membre crée sa propre unité de recouvrement financier afin de toucher vraiment les criminels là où ça fait mal. La commission offre son soutien sans réserve à la proposition de la Commission, mais nous voulons aller plus loin et plus vite. Je pense que le Parlement et la Commission s’accordent sur ce point. Le véritable problème - et je suis au regret de constater que les bancs du Conseil sont vides, comme à l’accoutumée - réside au niveau du Conseil, qui doit mettre en application et ratifier les choses qu’il promet. Ainsi, aucun des protocoles renforçant les pouvoirs d’Europol par le passé n’a été ratifié par la totalité des États membres. Europol reste nettement plus faible que ce qu’elle devrait être. Nous soutenons la Commission et voudrions vraiment que le Conseil agisse avec un peu plus de célérité."@fr⁸ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@hu¹¹ ". Signor Presidente, desidero ringraziare il signor Commissario per il discorso molto positivo e utile. Credo di poter parlare a nome della commissione per le libertà civili, la giustizia e gli affari interni affermando che sosteniamo il Commissario in quello che sta facendo. Desideriamo andare oltre sulla questione, ma vogliamo tutti combattere la criminalità organizzata quanto più efficacemente e velocemente possibile. Dunque, signor Commissario, sosterremo le sue proposte e continueremo a sollecitarla a compiere progressi per quanto potremo. Parlo a nome della commissione parlamentare in qualità di relatore, non a titolo personale. Raccomandiamo un pieno sostegno alla proposta della Commissione ma, come ha detto il Commissario, abbiamo suggerito alcune brevi aggiunte. Desideriamo rafforzare Europol, ma aspiriamo a farla diventare un’agenzia dell’Unione europea. Spero che gli onorevoli colleghi possano sostenere l’emendamento n. 45 proposto dal gruppo socialista, che afferma che Europol non verrà ulteriormente rafforzata fino a quando non diverrà una vera e propria agenzia comunitaria. Solo allora potremo dare a Europol il nostro appoggio incondizionato. Desideriamo confiscare i proventi della criminalità organizzata. C’è un punto che il signor Commissario non ha menzionato: poiché il crimine organizzato supera le frontiere, mentre l’applicazione della legge dipende dai singoli Stati membri e non può superarle, la commissione desidera segnalare – e abbiamo votato per questo punto – che c’è urgente bisogno di creare una forza di polizia dell’Unione europea. Non stiamo chiedendo in modo esplicito di crearla, ma stiamo sostenendo che esiste un urgente bisogno in questo senso. Dobbiamo riflettere su questo punto, per quanto possa trattarsi di una questione controversa a livello politico. Desidero ringraziare il Commissario per aver parlato di un’agenzia centralizzata all’interno di ogni Stato membro. Dobbiamo coordinare gli sforzi spesso frammentati all’interno dei singoli Stati membri. Il Commissario non ha menzionato l’idea di un ufficio per il recupero patrimoniale modellato sul sistema irlandese di Dublino, secondo il quale un’agenzia governativa può in pratica confiscare i proventi dei criminali sospetti e successivamente restituirli, qualora fosse comprovata la loro innocenza. Poiché i criminali operano per fare soldi, il fatto di vedersi sequestrare i propri proventi genera la loro ira: è questo il modo per colpirli più duramente. Noi, come commissione, vorremmo vedere un ufficio per il recupero patrimoniale in ognuno dei 25 Stati membri con l’obiettivo di colpire realmente i criminali laddove vengono maggiormente danneggiati. La commissione per le libertà civili, la giustizia e gli affari interni sostiene pienamente la proposta della Commissione, ma desideriamo andare oltre e agire più velocemente. Credo che il Parlamento e la Commissione siano alleati in questo senso. Il problema reale – e mi dispiace vedere che i banchi del Consiglio siano come al solito vuoti – è che il Consiglio dovrebbe rendere effettive e ratificare tutte le misure per cui ha preso un impegno. Per esempio, nessuno dei protocolli che rafforzano Europol è stato ratificato nel passato da tutti gli Stati membri. Europol continua a essere molto più debole di quanto dovrebbe essere. Sosteniamo la Commissione e vorremmo che il Consiglio agisse più velocemente."@it¹² "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@lv¹³ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@mt¹⁵ ". Mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik wil de commissaris bedanken voor zijn zeer positieve en nuttige toespraak. Ik denk dat ik kan spreken namens de Commissie burgerlijke vrijheden, justitie en binnenlandse zaken door te zeggen dat wij hem steunen bij wat hij doet. Wij mogen dan een beetje meer druk op de ketel willen zetten, maar uiteindelijk willen wij allemaal de georganiseerde misdaad zo effectief en zo snel mogelijk bestrijden. Daarom steunen wij u, commissaris, in uw voorstel en wij zullen u voorzover wij kunnen, blijven stimuleren om vooruitgang te boeken. Ik spreek voor de commissie als rapporteur, en niet voor mijzelf. Wij bevelen aan het voorstel van de Commissie volledig te blijven steunen, maar er zijn, zoals de commissaris heeft gezegd, kleine extra's die wij hebben aanbevolen toe te voegen. Wij willen Europol wel sterker maken, maar wij willen dat het een EU-agentschap wordt. Ik hoop dat mijn collega's amendement 45 van de socialistische fractie willen steunen, waarin gesteld wordt dat Europol niet meer versterkt wordt tot het een echt EU-agentschap is. Pas dan kunnen we onze volledige steun verlenen. Wij willen beslag leggen op de opbrengsten van de georganiseerde misdaad. Er is één punt dat de commissaris niet heeft vermeld: omdat de georganiseerde misdaad grensoverschrijdend is terwijl wetshandhaving een taak is van de afzonderlijke lidstaten en geen grenzen kan oversteken, wil de commissie erop wijzen – en hiervoor hebben wij gestemd – dat er een dringende behoefte bestaat om een politiekorps voor de Europese Unie te creëren. Wij zeggen dus niet “creëer het”, maar alleen maar dat er een dringende behoefte bestaat. Wij moeten hierover nadenken, hoe politiek controversieel het ook moge klinken. Ik ben de commissaris dankbaar dat hij spreekt van een centraal agentschap in iedere lidstaat. Dat hebben wij nodig om de dikwijls gefragmenteerde inspanningen binnen de afzonderlijke lidstaten te kunnen coördineren. Hij heeft geen melding gemaakt van de idee van een asset recovery-bureau, dat is gemodelleerd naar het Ierse systeem in Dublin waar een overheidsdienst de middelen van vermoedelijke criminelen in beslag kan nemen en deze vervolgens terug kan geven als blijkt dat ze onschuldig zijn. Omdat het criminelen om het geld gaat, raken ze erg van streek als hun middelen ze worden afgenomen. Zo raak je ze het hardst. Wij, als commissie, zouden graag zien dat in ieder van de 25 lidstaten een asset recovery-bureau wordt opgericht om de criminelen te raken waar ze het echt voelen. Onze commissie steunt het voorstel van de Europese Commissie volledig, maar wij willen verder gaan en sneller te werk gaan. Ik geloof dat het Parlement en de Commissie hierin bondgenoten zijn. Het echte probleem – en het spijt me te moeten zien dat de banken van de Raad, zoals gewoonlijk, leeg zijn – ligt bij de inwerkingstelling en ratificatie door de Raad van zaken waarvan hij de inwerkinstelling en ratificatie heeft toegezegd. Zo is geen van de protocollen tot versterking van Europol in het verleden geratificeerd door alle lidstaten. Europol is nog altijd veel zwakker dan het zou moeten zijn. Wij steunen de Commissie en wij zouden graag zien dat de Raad een beetje sneller te werk gaat."@nl³ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, agradeço ao Senhor Comissário a sua intervenção muito positiva e útil. Creio poder afirmar em nome da Comissão das Liberdades Cívicas, da Justiça e dos Assuntos Internos que o apoiamos no que está a fazer. No nosso caso, desejamos que se avance a um ritmo mais vivo, mas todos pretendemos combater o crime organizado do modo mais eficiente e expedito possível. Por conseguinte, o Senhor Comissário tem o nosso apoio naquilo que propõe e continuaremos a pressioná-lo fortemente para que prossiga por esta via, se pudermos. Falo em nome da comissão enquanto relator, não a título pessoal. Recomendamos que a Assembleia dê todo o apoio à proposta da Comissão, mas como disse o Senhor Comissário, sugerimos que lhe fossem aditados uns pequenos extras. Queremos reforçar a Europol, mas fazendo dela uma agência da UE. Espero que os colegas possam dar o seu apoio à alteração 45, proposta pelo Grupo Socialista, que visa excluir novos reforços de meios até que ela passe a ser uma agência da UE em sentido próprio. Desse modo, poderemos apoiá-la sem reservas. Queremos confiscar os proventos do crime organizado. Há um ponto a que o Senhor Comissário não fez referência: uma vez que o crime organizado atravessa as fronteiras, mas a acção de aplicação da lei é da competência dos Estados-Membros e não pode atravessar as fronteiras, a comissão pretende que fique consignado – e votámos este ponto – que há uma necessidade premente de criar uma força policial da União Europeia. Com isto não estamos a dizer "criem-na", mas sim que ela constitui uma necessidade premente. Temos de pensar nisso, por mais controverso que tal possa ser, politicamente. Agradeço ao Senhor Comissário por ter falado numa agência centralizada em cada Estado-Membro. Precisamos disso para coordenar os esforços muitas vezes fragmentários no interior dos Estados-Membros. Não mencionou a ideia de uma unidade de recuperação de bens, moldada à imagem do sistema irlandês de Dublin, em que um serviço governamental tem poderes para confiscar os activos de suspeitos da prática de actos criminosos, restituindo-os posteriormente no caso de serem dados como não culpados. Porque operam por dinheiro, a apreensão dos seus activos abala profundamente os criminosos. É a melhor maneira de os atingir. Nós, comissão parlamentar, gostaríamos que se criasse uma unidade de recuperação de bens em cada um dos 25 Estados-Membros para atingir os criminosos no seu ponto mais sensível. A Comissão das Liberdades Cívicas, da Justiça e dos Assuntos Internos apoia plenamente a proposta da Comissão, mas queremos ir mais longe e mais depressa. Considero que o Parlamento e a Comissão são aliados nesta matéria. O verdadeiro problema – e lamento que os lugares reservados ao Conselho, como de costume, estejam desertos – está em o Conselho, efectivamente, pôr em prática e ratificar os compromissos que assume. Por exemplo, nenhum dos protocolos destinados a reforçar a Europol que foram celebrados no passado foi ratificado pelos Estados-Membros. A Europol continua a ser muito mais fraca do que devia ser. Apoiamos a Comissão e gostaríamos muito que o Conselho avançasse com um pouco mais de rapidez."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@sk¹⁸ "Mr President, I thank the Commissioner for his very positive and helpful speech. I believe I can speak for the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs in saying that we support him in what he is doing. We want to press on a bit harder, but we all want to fight organised crime as effectively and as quickly as we possibly can. We therefore support you, Commissioner, in what you propose and we will continue to push you hard to keep up the progress, if we can. I speak for the committee as rapporteur, not for myself. We recommend full support for the Commission proposal but, as the Commissioner has said, there are little extras that we have suggested adding. We want to strengthen Europol but we want to make it an EU agency. I hope that colleagues can support Amendment 45 by the Socialist Group which refers to there being no more strengthening until it is a proper EU agency. Then we can give it flat-out support. We want to confiscate the profits of organised crime. There is one point that the Commissioner has not mentioned: because organised crime crosses frontiers but law enforcement is up to the individual Member States and cannot cross frontiers, the committee wants to point out – and we voted for this – that there is a pressing need to create a European Union police force. We are not saying ‘create it’, but that there is a pressing need. We have to think about that, however politically controversial it may be. I thank the Commissioner for talking about a centralised agency within each Member State. We need that to coordinate the often-fragmented efforts within individual Member States. He did not mention the idea of an asset recovery bureau, modelled on the Irish system in Dublin whereby a government agency can actually confiscate the assets of suspected criminals and subsequently give them back if they are proved to be not guilty. Because criminals operate to make money, if one takes away their assets, they get very upset. That is the way to hit them hardest. We, as a committee, would like to see an asset recovery bureau set up in every one of the 25 Member States to really hit the criminals where it hurts the most. The committee is in full support of the Commission proposal, but we want to go further and faster. I believe that Parliament and the Commission are allies on this. The real problem – and I am sorry to see that the Council benches, as usual, are empty – is the Council putting into effect and ratifying the things it says it will. For example, none of the protocols strengthening Europol in the past have been ratified by all Member States. Europol is still much weaker than it should be. We support the Commission and we would very much like the Council to move a bit faster."@sl¹⁹ ". Herr talman! Jag tackar kommissionsledamoten för hans mycket positiva och användbara tal. Jag anser att jag kan tala för utskottet för medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter samt rättsliga och inrikes frågor när jag säger att vi stöder honom i det han gör. Vi vill trycka på lite hårdare, men vi vill alla bekämpa den organiserade brottsligheten så effektivt och så snabbt som vi möjligen kan. Därför stöder vi er i det ni föreslår, herr kommissionsledamot, och vi kommer att fortsätta driva på er hårt för att hålla utvecklingen i gång, om vi kan. Jag talar för utskottet i egenskap av föredragande, inte personligen. Vi rekommenderar fullt stöd för kommissionens förslag, men, som kommissionsledamoten har sagt, finns det lite extra saker vi har föreslagit att man tillägger. Vi vill stärka Europol, men vi vill göra det till ett EU-organ. Jag hoppas att kollegerna kan stödja ändringsförslag 45 som utarbetats av den socialdemokratiska gruppen och som hänvisar till att det inte kan stärkas mer förrän det är ett riktigt EU-organ. Då kan vi ge det fullt stöd. Vi vill beslagta den organiserade brottslighetens vinster. Det finns en punkt som kommissionsledamoten inte har nämnt: eftersom organiserad brottslighet är gränsöverskridande men lagstiftningen är upp till de enskilda medlemsstaterna och inte gränsöverskridande, vill utskottet påpeka – och vi röstade för detta – att det finns ett brådskande behov av att skapa en EU-polisstyrka. Vi menar inte att den ska skapas nu, men att det finns ett brådskande behov. Vi måste se över detta, hur politiskt kontroversiellt det än må vara. Jag tackar kommissionsledamoten för att han talade om ett centraliserat organ inom varje medlemsstat. Vi behöver det för att samordna de ofta fragmentariska ansträngningarna inom enskilda medlemsstater. Han nämnde inte idén om en [byrå för återvinning av tillgångar], utformad efter det irländska systemet i Dublin genom vilket ett ämbetsverk kan beslagta misstänkta brottslingars tillgångar och sedan ge dem tillbaka om de bevisas vara oskyldiga. Eftersom brottslingar agerar i syfte att göra pengar blir de mycket upprörda om man fråntar dem deras tillgångar. Det är så man slår till hårdast mot dem. Vi vill som utskott se att en byrå för återvinning av tillgångar upprättas i alla 25 medlemsstater för att verkligen slå till mot brottslingarna där det gör som mest ont. Utskottet stöder kommissionens förslag till fullo, men vi vill gå längre och snabbare framåt. Jag förmodar att parlamentet och kommissionen är överens om detta. Det verkliga problemet – och jag tycker att det är synd att rådets bänkar står tomma som vanligt – är rådets verkställande och ratificerande av de saker det säger att det ska göra. Inga av de tidigare protokoll som stärker Europol har exempelvis ratificerats av alla medlemsstater. Europol är fortfarande mycket svagare än det borde vara. Vi stöder kommissionen, och vi skulle verkligen vilja att rådet snabbade på lite."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Aplausos)"^20,17 "(Applaudissements)"⁸ "(Applaus)"³ "(Applause)"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,13,4} "(Applausi)"¹² "(Applåder)"²¹ "(Beifall)"⁹ "(Bifald)"² "(Suosionosoituksia)"⁷ "(Χειροκροτήματα)"¹⁰ "Bill Newton Dunn (ALDE ),"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4} "asset recovery agency"²¹ "rapporteur"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4}