Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-19-Speech-1-100"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-10-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Evaluation mechanism to monitor the application of the Schengen acquis - Establishment of an evaluation mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091019.17.1-100"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-10-19-Speech-1-1012
lpv:speaker	lp:Véronique Mathieu Houillon2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (2009-07-14--2010-10-19)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2013-05-21)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the Mercosur countries (2009-09-16--2010-05-16)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2010-05-16)3 substitute; CONT (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; AGRI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, like many of my fellow Members, I fully support the report by Mr Coelho, who I sincerely thank for the excellent work he has accomplished. From the outset, the the of the lifting of internal border controls was the existence of compensatory measures designed to prevent the much-feared security deficit. These measures form the basis of the mutual confidence that is crucial to good cooperation in the Schengen area. Thus, it is only with an effective and transparent mechanism for evaluating the application of this Schengen that we will be able to ensure that this confidence is maintained and, therefore, that the Member States cooperate at a very high level. The challenge is therefore huge, and Parliament’s role in the creation of this new mechanism must be equal to this challenge. It follows that, if this text is adopted before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the mechanism, or at least the elements that come under the first pillar, will have to be adopted by codecision. Moreover, while conclusions must certainly be drawn from the integration of the Schengen into Community law and into EU law, this does not mean that the management of this evaluation should be entrusted to the Commission alone. Member States must have a greater involvement in this evaluation mechanism, or else this mutual confidence is in danger of diminishing. The same goes for the domestic security of our Member States. When a Member State does not apply this properly, it is all of the other Member States that suffer the consequences. Lastly, in terms of effectiveness, it does not seem appropriate to me to provide for two separate mechanisms for the two evaluation stages, which are the check prior to the application of the and the application of the by the Schengen States. I therefore join with Mr Coelho in calling on the Commission to withdraw this proposal and to present us with a new proposal that takes greater account of the philosophy of the and of the Member States’ role in evaluating its application."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"acquis"1 "raison d’être"1 "sine qua non"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph