Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-03-23-Speech-3-183-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20110323.19.3-183-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, honourable Members, the European Parliament addressed three questions related to the resettlement of refugees to the European Council. I would like to thank the three questioners very much for presenting in detail the considerations which led them to formulating the questions. All three questions were related to the Commission’s proposal which intends to amend the decision establishing the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008 to 2013 with regard to the establishment of a joint European Union resettlement programme. I believe that this debate also demonstrates the deep concern of the European Parliament for the fate of people who are most in need. Therefore, first, I would like to thank the honourable Members for paying such very close attention to resolving the situation of the refugees. As Mr Tavares remarked as well, coming from Hungary, with its inheritance of the 1956 revolution and as a commitment to that, the Hungarian Presidency has a moral obligation to achieve progress in the area of the joint European Union resettlement programme. The North African crisis, which several of you have referred to, has shown the need to establish a well-functioning, unified European asylum system. I agree with the European Parliament’s position that the European Union must accept responsibility in resolving the situation of refugees if it wishes to preserve its leading role in the provision of humanitarian aid. Allow to me to give you the very latest information on how the refugee situation on the borders of Libya is developing at this moment. I visited the Tunisian-Libyan border at the beginning of March. At that time one thousand refugees were arriving every hour, most of them migrant workers for whom finding a way home, a means of repatriation, was the most burning issue. Of them all, the people in the most difficult situation were those who arrived without any papers or documents at all. The international aid organisations on the spot were looking after them. Their number was growing; their repatriation, as such, is irresolvable, and therefore in this instance the resettlement system certainly comes into consideration. Today, or rather yesterday and today, the Hungarian Foreign Minister János Martonyi has been on the other side, on the Libyan-Egyptian border. The primary purpose of his visit was to learn about the refugee situation. He went to the border and met Egyptian officials there. The situation there, on this section, has changed now. For three days there has been no outflow from Libya on that section of the border. At present, there are about 200 people who should be able to take part in the resettlement programme. The others who have arrived until now are being evacuated, that is to say assisted in returning home, by the Egyptian authorities, incidentally with the help of EU Member States. By the way, Mr Martonyi has also held talks with the Foreign Minister of the Benghazi Transitional National Council, as well as the Egyptian Interior Minister precisely to gain an overview of the refugee situation. As regards a common European asylum policy, I would like to emphasise that we will do our utmost in order to create a common policy and system which is based on the full application of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention relating to the status of refugees and other relevant international conventions, and is in accordance with the commitments undertaken in the Stockholm Programme by the European Council. The Hungarian Presidency is committed to advancing the proposals in the refugee package. This is also shown by the fact that, based on last week’s authorisation granted by the Member States, we are ready to start informal trialogues on the Asylum Qualification Directive as soon as possible in order to achieve the target date of 2012. I thank you once again for the January debate which I presided over on this subject. Then, too, I replied to MEPs’ questions. I would also like to stress that the Council, as it acknowledges the importance of resettlement as a lasting solution for refugees, welcomed the proposal for a decision on establishing a joint EU resettlement programme and the related Commission announcement, which the Commission submitted back in September 2009. These initiatives stemmed from the agreement which the European Council reached in connection with the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum in September 2008, namely, that the resettlement of persons under the protection of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to the territory of the European Union could proceed for the time being on a voluntary basis. As a concrete example, I would highlight the conclusions of the Council in July and November 2008 in which the EU Member States made a commitment to resettle Iraqi refugees in their territory or rather this is what we encouraged them to do in these conclusions. In September 2009, the Council started the detailed examination of the proposal to amend the decision on establishing the European Refugee Fund. In the first half of 2010, informal meetings were held with the European Parliament on several occasions. The Member States, showing great flexibility, adopted the European Parliament’s proposals almost in their entirety in order to achieve the common objective, the establishment of a better, more flexible system in accordance with the Commission’s proposal. As the honourable Members rightly pointed out in their questions, the European Council and the European Parliament reached agreement on the political content of the decision as a result of the aforementioned informal meetings. The Council supported, for example, one of Parliament’s most important proposals, namely that a mechanism be created which would encourage newer Member States to join the resettlement programme through financial instruments among other things. The Council, however, could not support the proposal of the European Parliament which suggested that the adoption of the common EU annual resettlement priorities happen in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty through the application of the procedure relating to delegated acts. The position of the Council and the Commission is identical on this. The programming cycle for the operation of the General Programme on Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows sets tight deadlines, and effective planning can be provided through implementing acts. Furthermore, the Council agreed with the Commission’s opinion that defining annual resettlement priorities has only an implementing nature because essentially this means that the detailed rules in the decision are applied to specific situations. It is regrettable that the Council and the European Parliament were not able to agree in relation to the proposal at a level that would allow the common EU resettlement priorities to be defined for each year. However, we should not forget that resettlement is among the activities to be supported under the current European Refugee Fund for the period 2008 to 2013. It is true that, based on the proposed changes, the Member States taking part in the resettlement programme for the first time would receive somewhat greater financial support, and there would be an opportunity to define the geographic regions designated for resettlement and the nationalities in need of resettlement each year. Nonetheless, even now Member States are entitled to a fixed amount of EUR 4 000 for each person resettled who falls under one of the categories specified in the relevant decision. Apart from this, there is no obstacle to Member States which have not participated hereto starting resettlement activity under the current programme. It is a pleasure for me to inform you that Hungary, too, will become part of this programme next year and is prepared to participate in the resettlement programme. Lastly, I would like to emphasise that naturally the Council remains willing to consider all proposals that can be implemented and offer a mutually acceptable solution to outstanding issues related to this matter. Our aim, in accordance with the Commission’s proposal, is to make the existing mechanism even more flexible and efficient. I would very much like this extremely important matter not to become the captive of yet another question of legal interpretation. There are a great many issues where very important matters are the captives of the ‘implementing act’ versus ‘delegated act’ dilemma, and I would like positive progress to be achieved in these during the Hungarian Presidency. Thank you very much."@en1
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph