Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-09-Speech-3-513"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080709.42.3-513"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank all colleagues and especially the shadows I have worked with. We have had very constructive work together and I have welcomed their positive contributions. They have all been very engaged and I have been very grateful.
I want the VIS to work and to get going as soon as possible. In a sense it is my baby, as I was the rapporteur on the system itself. But, as colleagues have stressed, we are talking about very sensitive personal data and maybe 70 million entries at any one time. The VIS cannot afford to be treated as one vast experiment. We must proceed on a precautionary basis. I agree with those like Mrs Ždanoka and Mrs Roure that we do not have enough experience to be confident of avoiding problems, for instance with fingerprinting six-year-olds.
The Commissioner talked about whether we might not get going on the basis of having only verification between 6 and 12. Now that might meet some concerns, but not, I think, those of practicality and the cost of having to collect them every two years. Frankly, I do not think the Council thought that one through at all.
As Mrs Roure pointed out we are supposed to be building – or already to have – a common visa policy. That is why it is so disappointing that Member States basically have no willingness at all to cooperate on the same premises, and that they want to apply different visa fees by topping up the EUR 60. I would like the Commission to be rather proactive in trying to push the Member States to cooperate in different locations.
Mrs Klamt, whom I very much thank for her constructive criticism and willingness to work with us, has suggested that taking fingerprints of children from the age of six would be an effective tool against child trafficking. I have to say I am not aware of any serious research suggesting it would achieve this aim. Why choose the age of six? Why not five, or four, or three, or indeed zero? There might be a far bigger risk of baby-snatching than of six-year-olds being kidnapped.
Finally, Mr Coelho’s suggestion to merge this report with the visa code is an interesting one. He has thrown what cricketers call a ‘googly’ into this debate and I think we will have to take that back to the committee and see what they think about that. In one sense I am open-minded but I think it is up to the committee."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples