Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-04-Speech-3-484-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20120704.29.3-484-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I personally am very pleased with this debate that we are having again today on this new Schengen governance in the broadest sense of the term. It means that we can reiterate our concerns about protecting the free movement of persons, a formidable EU body of legislation. Cases of breaches of Schengen rules, alluded to by the Commission in its first Schengen bill of health, invite us, Commissioner, to request you to shed as much light as possible on these matters, as you indicated when you first spoke. We first urge the Member States to adopt greater transparency. This transparency must be part of a mechanism to strengthen mutual trust between Member States, and to enable them to implement all the Schengen provisions effectively. However, we also need to be able to rely on a courageous European Commission which does not hesitate to draw on its powers, as guardian of the Treaties, to ensure that Community law is appropriately implemented, and all the more so in the case of the fundamental right, and I will come back to that, of the freedom of movement of our fellow citizens. More than ever before, the examples that have been mentioned, whether Germany or the Netherlands, although we could think back to older examples such as Italy and France, and the border at Ventimiglia, are sufficient argument for us to make further calls for the introduction of a European Schengen evaluation mechanism, a Community-based one in which Parliament would have a full role to play. The new Cypriot Presidency will have the onerous task of trying to find a positive outcome to the conflict that sets us apart on this issue. Furthermore, I must admit, President-in-Office of the Council, that I did not fully recognise in what you were saying either what had been said or the outcome of our previous discussions, although this is undoubtedly due to a misunderstanding on my part. I would like to remind you that the system which had been applied in certain areas was an intergovernmental system. It is no longer suitable for the European Union as it is developing now, particularly if we want to put the support of the European people for our common project on a permanent footing. In the absence of a shared view of these situations at the borders, it is highly likely that the same party-political arguments and their populist slant will remain the order of the day, and that, frankly, is toxic to our European democracy. I shall conclude by reaffirming that the only weapon we can use to respond to the challenge posed by the structural fragility of certain borders, a fragility which clearly concerns us all, is that of European solidarity and a Community approach."@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
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph