Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-064"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010313.7.2-064"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I could at this point make an exceedingly short contribution – so short that it would consist of the single word ‘no’. No to these three initiatives. And yet here we are, going through the motions of a debate all over again. The authors of the proposal are absent so we are having a pleasant chat with the Commissioner on the subject, as he pointed out just now. Consequently, I think I will take advantage of the time allotted to me under the Rules of Procedure to make a few remarks. They will appear in the Minutes and should then reach the Council.
Firstly, I should like to thank the rapporteurs for the work they have put into carrying out a thorough legal analysis of the proposals. Their authors often seem to neglect to do so.
I shall deal separately with Mr Nassauer’s report because I think the other two reports concern different issues.
With regard to Mr Nassauer’s report, I should like to reiterate what I said earlier this morning. All too often we are presented with apparently simple proposals concerning very real and complex problems. Obviously, if you tell someone who is not that familiar with our literature that a person who has been expelled from one Member State should be expelled from all Member States, that first person is bound to agree. It seems sensible and logical. However, things are not that straightforward. An individual’s human rights have to be respected. So for this to come about a clear legal framework is needed, an effective common immigration policy, and an awareness of how and why a decision on expulsion should be dealt with in all Member States. I must congratulate Mr Nassauer on not having been taken in by the apparent simple-mindedness, if not simplicity, enshrined in the Council’s proposal.
Turning to the reports by Mr Deprez and Mrs Frahm, I have to say that I think we really are in a very worrying position. These two Members have already explained far better than I could the technical and legal reasons why they advocate rejection of this proposal. I should, however, like to refer to a matter which seems to me to be of the highest political importance. The proposal considered by Mr Deprez contains the following sentence, “Because Member States have an enhanced role in respect of the development of visa policy”. This reflects the political sensitivity of the matter, in particular where relations with third countries are involved. It is used to support the argument that the Council should have the right to exercise implementing powers in this area. I find this very worrying. I believe it is a matter of great concern as we discuss a common visa list and are already implementing the free movement of persons.
Will both Parliament and the Commission be called on again to come to the defence of the principle of freedom of movement and the Community bases for the implementation of this principle? Will we have to re-enact debates held prior to 1992? I trust the Council will take due note so that we can avoid doing so."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples