Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-19-Speech-1-128"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091019.19.1-128"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to begin by thanking Vice-President Barrot for his statement, although he is in an unfair position, because it would also be good to hear the Council’s position. Clearly, it is easier to exercise parliamentary scrutiny of the Commission than of the Council.
In December 2001, the Commission was given a mandate to introduce the second generation of the Schengen Information System (SIS), which was expected to come into operation in March 2007. There have been many problems and delays. The new system is still not working. Some people predict that it will not be running before 2012, while others question the very viability of the project. There are now delays not only in SIS, but also in the Visa Information System (VIS), as both projects are being developed by the same company.
I must say here that I continue to have confidence in Vice-President Barrot. In his political life, he has always shown himself to be competent, serious and a true pro-European. We know that he did not initiate the SIS project; he inherited it when he accepted a change of portfolio at the request of President Barroso. However, the services of the European Commission and the company contracted to develop the central system should clearly be held to account.
Parliament has budgetary authority, and we have the right and the obligation to seek an explanation from the European Commission. Why do we need SIS II? We need better control of our external borders, we need more security, we need biometric data, and we need alerts to be interlinked. Two global technical tests, the so-called milestone tests, are planned, the first on 22 December, and the second in the summer of 2010. The aim of the first test is to check the smooth, reliable and effective operation of SIS II under operational conditions, for a period of 72 hours, and to check that the vital core features and data consistency can function without any problems or interruptions.
This raises a number of questions. First, is there any risk that might jeopardise the implementation of the test in December of this year? Secondly, in order to lower the risk, is the possibility of reducing the level of requirements or even the number of states participating in the test being considered? Thirdly, can these new tests be considered part of the annual contract with the company, or will they be regarded as additional requirements, incurring extra costs? Fourthly, has the detection of problems and technical errors led to additional services being added to the contract? How much money has been paid out on these grounds? Fifthly, what was the total amount of the penalties imposed on the contractor – as mentioned by Vice-President Barrot – for the delays and technical errors that caused the previous tests to be unsuccessful? In the sixth place, does the Commission consider that, if there is a switch to implement an alternative solution, this will mean the termination of the contract with Steria? If this is the case, what implications will it have for the VIS?
Finally, Madam President, one last question: Is it true that Bulgaria and Romania have given up waiting for SIS II, and their integration into SIS I is already being planned?"@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples