Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-18-Speech-4-204"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010118.11.4-204"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like first of all to congratulate Mr Deprez on his brilliant report which deserves our full support. We have of course worked very hard on this report in our Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. My dear Mr Deprez, I could not have wished for a better time for this report to be dealt with, because this is an excellent time – whenever Parliament sits is an excellent time – but I would have wished you better speakers.
But irrespective of this, I believe that the speakers who will now take the floor instead of the original speakers are perfectly able to make a contribution to this debate. I should like to say quite clearly that both Mr Deprez's comments on the legal basis and his criticism of the Council and the Commission's approach to this area deserve our full support. The Council and the Commission are acting just as unsystematically on this important issue as we almost did just now and as we have done this week regarding the agenda. Where asylum and immigration are concerned we are dealing with a completely confused policy where individual initiatives are put to us one after another – sometimes by the Council, sometimes by the Commission, sometimes by individual Member States – but where there is no strategic approach. But this is also precisely what this proposal – which is perfectly sensible in practice – is suffering from. There is no strategic approach which draws a clear distinction between asylum and immigration, which regulates both appropriately and which deals with the important issue of burden-sharing, and all of this gives rise to problems. These problems are then once again resolved by the back door by means of bureaucratic chicanery, and they are not resolved for good: these are pseudo-solutions.
If this initiative really does make the lives of those people who have a long-stay visa in the European Union easier then I welcome it. But you cannot treat cancer with aspirin. The way in which we have handled this important field in the last few years – and unfortunately still do so – cannot be allowed to continue. That is why I believe that Mr Deprez's critical comments are more than justified. Practical easing of restrictions in the interests of people, yes. Sensible burden-sharing where burdens arise, yes. And of course free movement for third-country nationals within the European Union. But we call on the Council and the Commission finally to move from patch-up jobs to a systematic, strategic policy in this area and to present an overall, unified vision through which we can move step by step."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples