Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-16-Speech-3-102"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010516.4.3-102"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"In the resolution it has just adopted on questions relating to the police, justice and the free movement of persons, the European Parliament is once again calling for the complete ‘communitarisation’ of immigration policy and all related policies, such as asylum and temporary protection. Meanwhile we must once again repeat the point that although European coordination is obviously essential, the people of each country must have the sovereign power to make the final decision determining who may remain on its territory.
The Treaty of Amsterdam had already transferred these matters to a Community framework by taking them away from the national parliaments, but with two vital derogations from the usual procedures: the Commission must share its power of initiative to propose texts with the Member States during a transitional period fixed at not more than five years after the entry into force of Amsterdam (i.e. until 1 May 2004); the Council will take its decisions not by a qualified majority but unanimously for at least five years, which means that for the time being each country retains its sovereign decision-making power. These are the two derogations to which the European Parliament's resolution for which we voted today is most strongly opposed: it disputes that the Member States have any right to propose texts, on the pretext that they would exercise this power in an uncoordinated manner; it wishes the qualified majority system to apply more widely (or perhaps totally; this is not made quite clear), a wish that would largely be granted by the Treaty of Nice if it is ratified.
We take the opposite position: if it came to the point that immigration questions were decided by a majority, that would take the power away from the countries and put it in the hands of uncontrollable lobbies, or perhaps even to one member country that was better placed than the others in the decision-making procedures. For the good of Europe these powers, the power of proposal and of decision, should remain among the sovereign competences of each nation. In particular, direct decision-making power should be returned to the national parliaments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples