Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-21-Speech-1-100"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-10-21"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Refugee status for third country nationals and stateless persons2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021021.7.1-100"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-10-21-Speech-1-1012
lpv:speaker	lp:Georges Berthu2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; NA (2001-01-31--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Mouvement pour la France (2000-11-23--2004-07-19)3 member; AFCO (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the proposal for a directive presented by the Commission to set out the conditions for granting refugee status does not reflect the state of the world, nor the current needs of Europe. This text constantly seeks to broaden the definition of refugees provided by the Geneva Convention. For example, the persecutor does not, from now on, always have to be a State, it could also be a non-State organisation. To take another example, the probable causes of persecution have been drafted in a broad and open manner, as acknowledged in the Explanatory Statement itself, which explains, for example, that a person, persecuted on account of membership of a social group, may also be persecuted on the grounds of sex or sexual orientation. That is not all, however. The proposal for a directive creates a whole new category, subsidiary protection, which is in addition to the status of refugee provided for under the Geneva Convention. So, Mr President, I believe that we must stop. There are many – often tragic – crises in the world that we have a duty to attempt to alleviate. The countries of the European Union cannot receive any more refugees, however. How many refugees, by the way? We do not know. The text gives no evaluation. What will be the financial burden for the taxpayer? It is a mystery. We do not know. No evaluation is proposed for this either. It is strange, nonetheless, that, at a time when the Member States are seeking to put a stop to bogus asylum applications – which have become the main source of illegal immigration – the Commission is, for its part, trying to open the floodgates. This is not a responsible course of action. We, for our part, believe that our main task is to protect our people. In such circumstances, the communitarisation of the immigration policy at Amsterdam, giving the Commission a monopoly on initiative after 2004, would appear to be a serious mistake. If the Member States do not want to pay a high price, they must find a way to change this situation during the next intergovernmental conference."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph