Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-01-31-Speech-4-019"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080131.4.4-019"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, my group would agree with much of what has been said, particularly the emphasis on the need for the protection of fundamental rights as a core basis of many of the decisions we would like to see taken in the remaining period of this Parliament.
My group would also agree that an interinstitutional agreement would be useful to avoid the sort of arbitrary use of codecision that we have seen on occasion, that sort of arbitrary use at the behest of the Council when many of us felt, because things could not be got through by unanimity, Parliament was being used as a sort of alibi. We would rather see these sort of arrangements set within a proper framework – and within something that is not going to delay for five years much of the progress that we want to see happen.
In terms of the issues about fundamental rights, we are deeply concerned that one of the issues which does not seem to have been resolved in the Council is the question of procedural safeguards.
Many in this Parliament agreed to the introduction of the European arrest warrant, believing that procedural safeguards would soon follow. Others who were obviously more sceptical said we wanted to see the safeguards first and then we would look at greater cooperation between Member States. So we would like to know, please, when we can expect these measures, which are deeply important to all of our citizens.
We also share the concern voiced this morning on questions about data protection. There are growing concerns about the lack of transparency and, certainly, growing public concern about the way in which data is being used and exchanged without any clear information to the public as to what exactly is happening.
I was slightly concerned, to put it mildly, to hear the Council talk about the issues of the Returns Directive, saying that some Member States do not want return to become more difficult. Some of us might believe that what this means is that the Council does not want to see a safe, secure and open procedure put in place that guarantees the rights of individuals rather than simply, as in the case of some Member States, trying to meet targets through return.
We do not want return necessarily to become more difficult. We want it to become a more open procedure which safeguards rights. One of the issues with which we have concern, for example, is the use by some Member States of an automatic re-entry ban. We also share the concerns on length of detention.
I welcome the statement that was made about the proposal on highly-qualified migrants. At last we may see a positive measure on an immigration policy, a move away from what some of us see as a policy of deterrents that the Union has been following for some time. At last we will get an agreement on something more positive and more open, even if it is only affects a small part of those people coming to the European Union.
But I would welcome a comment, please, on what is happening on the sanctions against employers. Lastly, I would also like an answer to the question posed to both the Council and Commission on the comment about the UK’s position on treaty reform."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples