Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-14-Speech-3-340"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000614.13.3-340"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to highlight two positive things. The first is the working document presented by the Commission, which was the starting point for the report. It is a sound basis for instituting a debate which should culminate at some point in a legal act setting out common standards for an asylum procedure.
The second is the report, which I particularly wish to highlight, because the rapporteur really has succeeded in finding a broad consensus right across the political divide on a very delicate matter. That is no easy task and we have all experienced quite the opposite here, which is why this is an excellent piece of work. I should like to pick up on three points which I think are particularly important and which I would ask the Commission to take into consideration.
The first is the question of how to divide the burden and has already been addressed. We must not concentrate on just one aspect; we need to remain receptive to a distribution in terms of people. If you look at refugee movements, you will see that they always affect the same countries. Austria, for example, where I come from, is always near the top of the list when it comes to admitting temporary refugees or asylum seekers. It is on a par with Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands. Others have a much lighter burden to bear and greater solidarity between the Member States is needed here.
I should like to highlight the question of shortening and simplifying the qualification procedures without – and that is the crux of the matter – compromising careful examination. It is an important point, because asylum seekers are entitled to a fast decision and a fast answer on their future status.
The third point is that which gives legal certainty and which, when implemented, helps to ensure that identical decisions are taken in all Member States. It is the point which requires us to keep up-to-date lists of safe third countries and countries of origin. It will help enormously if we manage to draw up these lists. It attracted a broad consensus but I fear that this consensus will not perhaps hold up if all the amendments proposed by the Greens are included. They want much that is positive, but they want a lot that is total, as Mrs Merkel once remarked. If, for example, they want to implement the total extension of the definition of refugee or total access for asylum seekers to the job market or work to reverse the burden of proof, then the consensus achieved with their vote in committee will be jeopardised. I call on them to consider withdrawing these proposed amendments so that the broad consensus can be maintained."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples