Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-10-Speech-1-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000410.4.1-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, because of its wealth, Western Europe is naturally a magnet for everyone seeking protection and fleeing persecution. Our share in the task arising from a growing influx of refugees must, of course, correspond in scope and importance to our prosperity and to our global and historical role. But encounters between people from different cultures are not always simple, and they should therefore be helped along, just as refugees should be given support to begin new lives in their new locations. The Member States each tackle these matters in very different ways, and rightly so, because they each start from perspectives within their different cultures and traditions. However, all refugees have some basic needs in common, and special groups need professional help and support so that they can again start to live lives appropriate to human beings. What is more, they need advice and guidance from the authorities in their new countries and in connection with their actual seeking of asylum.
All refugees begin with a dream of returning home. For some, this becomes a reality but, for others, the period in exile proves to be so long that returning home is unrealistic. They acquire children and friends and a new life for themselves. The children put down roots in the new country, and these become stronger than their parents’ roots in the old country. Therefore, a number of them choose in the end perhaps to apply for citizenship in the new country. A number of surveys show, however, that, even for those who achieve their dream of returning home, it is very important that the period in exile should have been meaningful, that they should have had the opportunity to grow as people and that their qualifications should have been used so that they do not cease to develop as people and are not hindered from developing professionally in their own fields by stagnation, passivity, uncertainty and lack of qualifications. Integration and repatriation are not, therefore, opposed to each other, and integration is not only for people who wish to move country for good. It is also of significant help to those who subsequently return home. It may, in fact, prove to be a prerequisite of successful repatriation. I do not, therefore, understand why some people want to distinguish between displaced persons and refugees.
Responsibilities in Europe are unfairly distributed in relation both to the Member States’ size and prosperity. The European Refugee Fund is a first and very modest attempt to distribute resources in proportion to the tasks which individual Member States promise to undertake. It is not a question of the ratio between the number of refugees and the number of existing citizens. It is a question of the actual task which is to be undertaken. It is not about relative numbers, but actual numbers. I think that some of the amendments from the Group of the European People’s Party and the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party must be based upon a misunderstanding in this area. I hope the discussion may make it a little clearer what the thinking here is. But because the task is a considerable one and because it has been unfairly distributed, it is naturally sad that the fund in question should be so small. We are talking about EUR 26 million to cover the fixed expenses of the current work, distributed among 15 Member States. Not much is, in fact, being given to those Member States which really have taken a considerable degree of responsibility upon themselves. By German or Italian reckoning, the amount must seem tiny. In addition, there is, of course, some uncertainty about the fund’s financial future. I am very anxious to know whether the Commission has some good news for us and whether it has given the necessary consideration to the issue in question so that the Fund will have a future and not just become a nonsense over the next few years. All in all, however, the European Refugee Fund is, in fact, to be regarded as a start. And if it has a good beginning and if we are able to follow up the issue, then it will only be natural for us to increase the amount concerned so that the Fund really can live up to its name as the European Refugee Fund."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples