Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-19-Speech-1-080"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091019.17.1-080"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The creation of an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis is an important measure which will put into practice the decisions concerning the area of freedom, security and justice, especially the provisions of the Hague Programme. The draft proposals submitted for debate today are a variation of an evaluation mechanism. They include provisions specific to the targeted area, along with an adequate control methodology.
However, a closer analysis highlights that certain principles of interinstitutional cooperation are being ignored, both at European Union level and between EU Member States. From this point of view, the proposal submitted includes provisions restricting cooperation between Member States with regard to evaluating the results from the application of the Schengen Agreement. At the same time, it increases unacceptably the role of the Commission in this process, while the European Parliament is kept outside the entire evaluation mechanism.
Furthermore, the wording of some articles in the regulation leaves scope for different interpretations of the relationship between the Commission, Parliament and Council with regard to their access to information about the application of the Schengen acquis.
Therefore, Article 14, aimed at sensitive information, emphasises that ‘the reports drawn up following on-site visits shall be classified as restricted. The Commission, after consulting the Member State concerned, shall decide which part of the report can be made public.’
I also wish to mention in connection with these provisions that Article 16, which refers to the report submitted to the European Parliament and Council, does not imply that the annual report on the evaluations carried out will contain restricted information as well. We could therefore deduce that it is up to the Commission to assess which information will be included in the annual report and which not. This fact assigns the Commission functions which, in my view, are not justified.
The Treaty of Lisbon will soon come into force and from then on, codecision will become the normal legislative procedure, which also covers the area of freedom, security and justice. The legislative proposals which we are debating at the moment contain provisions which conflict with the principles included in the Treaty. Consequently, these drafts, if they are approved now, will need to be reviewed at the time when the Treaty of Lisbon comes into force.
Fellow Members, freedom, security and justice are areas of paramount importance to Europe’s citizens whose interests are represented directly by the European legislative. Restricting the role of an institution like the European Parliament is wrong. I wish to conclude by supporting the proposal made by Mr Coelho, that this draft, in its current form, needs to be rejected and returned to the Commission. I propose to you that we support the draft resolution."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples