Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-08-Speech-2-161"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030408.4.2-161"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, once again I can only highlight the fact that the text that has been submitted to us represents a significant pro-immigration shift. The idea is always the same: to promote ever more immigration in Europe and to make the right to family reunification the driving force behind this Community policy. One month ago, the European Union's Justice and Home Affairs Council reached a difficult consensus on the directive on family reunification. Today the rapporteur is proposing to amend this compromise, that she considers to be too restrictive, because it does not go far enough in advocating the right to extended family reunification.
What is actually proposed here is an extension of the definition of family member to include unmarried partners, children of full age and relatives in the ascending line if they have no other means of support. But who is going to decide whether the fact that they have no other means of support is legally significant? Even a homosexual partnership, for instance, is seen here as equivalent to a family relationship. Nevertheless, it states, the relationship will have to be stable and long term. What a joke! But the floodgates have been opened. They have for all applicants. This means that if just one person comes in almost fifteen more will be able to settle with them.
We are not unsympathetic to the fact that some foreign families have to live apart. But if you want to avoid their being uprooted as a result, why do you never consider, in these times of unemployment, the possibility of organising family reunification in the countries of origin? And why not devote a portion of our development funds to this, as all too often these funds actually only serve to take money from the pockets of the poor in rich countries to line the pockets of the rich in poor countries. Is this the real purpose of family reunification? Should it not instead be focused on the migrants' countries of origin?
More than ever we denounce this immigration of colonisation, which is organised by the Member States with the active collusion of the European institutions: our right to asylum is a mess; border checks have been abandoned; illegal immigrants are having their positions legalised; marriages of convenience are flourishing, and so on. All of this must stop. It is our duty to put an end to this suicidal policy that is being pursued by Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples