Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.5.2-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Due to the need for consistency with the position previously adopted by the European Parliament in plenary session on 11 December 2000, when the French initiative – which lacked any legal basis – proposing the adoption of a directive on mutual recognition of decisions concerning expulsion of third-country nationals, was rejected, I do not feel able to adopt any other stance on this initiative than a similar rejection.
As was already the case with the Directive itself, the issue is not the proposal’s substance or its actual political content, which in fact I consider quite positive, since it seeks to introduce rules and suitable practical methods for correcting any possible financial imbalances resulting from the implementation of the Directive in question. In other words, the Member State responsible for the expulsion decision must reimburse the Member State which enforces that decision, on the basis of the real costs of the operation, up to a maximum level, which should be reasonable, comparable and balanced, and should cover transport, administration and accommodation.
Nevertheless, since we have before us an initiative on the application of Directive 2001/40/EC, which was rejected due to its lack of a legal basis, we are once again unable, by the same logic, to adopt any stance other than a rejection of this initiative."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples