Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-047"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010313.6.2-047"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, at this point I would like to return to the two points on which we are critical of the Commission proposal. The first is the issue of dual optionality in the allocation of refugees from civil wars, that is to say the possibility that a refugee has to select a country, and a country's right to reject any refugee.
The founding fathers created the ‘European home’ as a place for solidarity, above all. This solidarity can still be seen today, for example when European funding is used to support structurally weak regions. So not only is the call for more equitable burden sharing as regards receiving refugees justified, but also burden sharing itself is an expression of solidarity between the peoples of Europe. As various Members have already pointed out, only a few Member States bore a share of the burdens resulting from the civil wars in former Yugoslavia. It is all very easy for Mrs Frahm to talk big, because she comes from a country which has not, so far, exactly distinguished itself when it comes to such acts of solidarity.
Unlike the governments at the Nice Summit, we, as directly elected Members of the European Parliament, are obliged here to overcome national differences and to opt for a European solution founded upon a quota-based allocation of refugees in accordance with Member States' absorptive capacity. Otherwise, dual optionality will render the positive approach adopted in the Commission's proposal superfluous.
The second important point is family reunification. Here, too, a fundamental principle of our Community is at stake – subsidiarity. Today it will be decided whether the EU should reserve for itself, in a centralist way, the process of defining and regulating what constitutes a family, or whether in the first place the concept of a nuclear family, which is common to all Member States, should be taken as a basis, with regulations going any further than that being at Member States' discretion. The compromise amendment tabled by the rapporteur, Mr Wiebenga, provides for the latter. This follows this House's tradition of fighting the attempts of the Brussels bureaucracy to arrogate to itself the powers of the Member States. Today, you have a chance to demonstrate what this concept of subsidiarity means to you. I urge you to vote for the fair traditions of this House and for the fundamental principles of our Community of values, and not to be swayed by purely national interests and party political calculations. I urge you, when it comes to these important issues, to vote for Mr Wiebenga's compromise amendments."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples