Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-07-Speech-4-256"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101007.29.4-256"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The visa liberalisation in 2009 demonstrated to all intents and purposes that many people in the Balkans equate visa-free travel with being given
. Countless people have used the more liberal visa conditions to travel into the European Union. How many of those people actually went back to their home countries once the period of time granted for their stay had expired, nobody knows. It does not seem to be clear to the people in question that visa liberalisation has nothing to do with jobs or the right of abode. The maths of stemming illegal entry into the EU through a readmission agreement cannot stack up while visa liberalisation continues to be abused. This idea needs to be put paid to. Kosovo, in particular, represents a major problem for us in this regard. The EU has never been able to decide what it thinks more important or what it thinks is correct and proper – territorial integrity or the right of self-determination for peoples – and because we have ignored the problem of multinational states for too long, what we have now is a divided Balkan state. To use a visa agreement in order, indirectly, to almost force recognition of Kosovo in this way, when some Member States have not recognised it, contradicts the principle of subsidiarity and is a violation of national rights, which should be rejected in the strongest possible terms. In light of the above considerations, I voted against the Fajon report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples