Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-15-Speech-3-182"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000315.5.3-182"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the Commission would like to welcome, first of all, the very clear statement issued by the representative of the Council to the effect that the Eurodac system is only a system conceived to implement the Dublin Convention. I would also like to confirm, as the representative of the Council has already said, that there is a problem concerning the territorial application of the Eurodac regulation. I can also confirm that the Council did not ask the Commission to come forward with a revised proposal. Nevertheless, this is a very sensitive issue, as the debate has already shown, and one of the few cases where the three institutions do not have the same position, as I very clearly stated before Parliament. The Commission, in this case, has a different position from both the Council and Parliament. That is why, although not being asked to come forward with a new proposal, we decided that to clarify the political options that are on the table we should do that extra work and come before the Council with a revised proposal.
In its revised proposal the Commission takes on board the solution proposed by Parliament that the data should be deleted from the base as soon as someone is recognised as a refugee. On the other hand, we did not subscribe to the idea of Parliament about the age limit for fingerprinting. We considered that 14 years old is an adequate solution. Perhaps this is because I come from a country – which the representative of the Council also comes from – where our children, when they are ten years old, in order to get their first identity card, are fingerprinted. It is inconceivable for me that my country is one which criminalises all children of 10 years of age just because they are fingerprinted for their first identity card. I still remember that it was a major event in my youth to get my own identity card.
Nevertheless, I recognise this is a very sensitive question. Consequently, the Commission believes it should clarify to Parliament two very strict and clear ideas. First, we should not ask Eurodac to give answers that Eurodac cannot give. That is why we consider that some of the questions Baroness Ludford raised and some of the issues that were raised by Mrs Boumediene-Thiery – which are very important – have to be addressed in the context of the regulation on temporary protection and on subsidiary protection that the Commission is actively preparing. We will come to Parliament and the Council with proposals in the next few months.
We have just achieved, this week, a working document to re-evaluate the Dublin Convention itself. We want to launch a debate not only on the technical questions of Eurodac but also on the essential solutions to the current Dublin Convention. We do not want to lose time. We want to have as broad a picture as possible for all instruments that concern asylum policy.
Where is the point of difference between the Commission and the Council? Of course, the Council has been generous in the sense that it has given to the Commission management and the technical functioning of the system. But there is a point where the Commission does not agree with the Council. We do not agree that the Council should reserve for itself the powers of implementation of the system. According to the comitology agreement, there are not sufficient grounds for the Council to reserve the implementing powers for itself rather than delegating them to the Commission. The proposal of the Commission is that the executive powers, the implementing powers of the system, should be delegated to the Commission, associated with a committee composed of representatives from all Member States. In our opinion this will be a more coherent and transparent way of managing the system and reinforcing the capability of Parliament to scrutinise the way the Commission manages and develops the Eurodac system.
Maybe through this balanced solution it will be possible to address in a more relaxed and trusting way some of the reservations and political doubts that have been raised by several Members of Parliament during this debate. Maybe I am being stubborn but this is what I sincerely believe."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples