Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-19-Speech-1-078"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091019.17.1-078"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I will try to respond to the concerns expressed by Mr Coelho in his report.
The evaluation mechanism is a key measure when it comes to preserving the integrity of the Schengen area and to maintaining mutual confidence between the Member States. That is why the Commission is proposing that the experts from the Member States be fully involved in planning the visits, the in situ visits, and in drafting the evaluation and follow-up reports.
The Commission is, of course, convinced that Parliament should be involved in the Schengen evaluation, which is not the case at present. The citizens must have access to the results of these evaluations. That is why the Commission has offered to submit annual reports to Parliament indicating the conclusions reached following each evaluation and the progress of the corrective measures.
So that is the first response. It is true that Mr Coelho raised the issue of codecision for Parliament. The treaties currently in force do not permit this. However, although there is no codecision as yet, the proposals do communitise the current mechanism. Through these proposals, the mechanism can be made more effective with regard to planning, the in situ visits and the follow-up given to the evaluations.
Moreover, the role of the Commission, as guardian of the treaties, will be enhanced. However, Mr Coelho, this enhanced role is being challenged strongly by the Council. Therefore, under the treaties in force, two parallel proposals were required, since the Schengen
covers both the first and the third pillars.
The Commission considered that Article 66 of the EC Treaty, which provides for consultation of the European Parliament, was the correct legal basis for the proposal of the first pillar. This legal basis was chosen as the correct one for the current Schengen evaluation mechanism when the Schengen
was integrated into the European Union framework by the ‘breakdown’ decision taken in 1999.
Articles 30 and 31 of the treaty were the ones chosen as a legal basis for the proposal of the third pillar. That is why we had to refer to two different articles for the evaluation of the first pillar and for that of the third pillar.
The Commission, on the basis of the treaties in force and of the legal debates that derive from them, must stand by its proposals. It must be said, Mr Coelho, that, given the difficult negotiations at the Council regarding the enhanced role of the Commission, it is conceivable that they will not be concluded in the short term. We can hope, above all today, that this Treaty of Lisbon will be ratified, and then the matter will be reopened and the Commission will decide, when the time comes, what it considers to be the most appropriate legal basis for the proposed mechanism by involving the European Parliament as fully as possible.
Obviously, when that time comes, the Commission will be able to submit amended or new proposals depending on the situation. As you know, I myself am generally very much in favour of this provision, which will enable your Parliament to act as a colegislator in most of the issues relating to justice, freedom and security. Clearly, I can only be in favour of a much more active role for Parliament. However, as things stand, I do not think that we could have done anything other than to propose this amendment on the current legal bases. Nevertheless, as I told you, the discussions at the Council are not easy; this is not because we did not want to involve the Member States, but because the Commission, in its role as guardian of the treaties, feels that it, too, is responsible for managing this entire evaluation mechanism, with the involvement of the Member States and, of course, Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples