Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-10-Speech-1-081"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-04-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Refugee Fund2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000410.4.1-081"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-04-10-Speech-1-0822
lpv:speaker	lp:Hubert Pirker2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Österreichische Volkspartei (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, South-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, there are many reasons why, in principle, I welcome what the Commission has submitted: firstly, because the Commission is sending a signal to the Member States that they are not alone in the problems of migration, refugees and displaced persons; secondly, because it at least regulates in part the distribution of the burden; and, thirdly, because the Commission is proposing a differentiated package of responsibilities for two different groups, namely recognised refugees and displaced persons, i.e. persons temporarily seeking protection. I welcome the proposal because it clearly defines the target groups, because the acceptance conditions will be improved and the integration of refugees supported, and because the re-integration of temporary refugees will be promoted. However, I do not share the view that Mrs Frahm’s report can be accepted almost without criticism because I consider that measures which go beyond these defined responsibilities are inappropriate. Firstly, the money is not available and, secondly, there are other totally different groups which have a claim to it if you are talking here about groups which are particularly in need of protection, and we are unquestionably talking about persons within the meaning of the Geneva Convention. I also do not support your proposals for measures which are incompatible with the particular groups. When it comes to refugees, the measures should be different to those for displaced persons. You cannot, in the case of displaced persons whose main concern is to return to their homeland, require that the host country integrate them into the labour market. That contradicts the basic intention. However, we must seek to make an amendment when it comes to the allocation of funds, taking the number of refugees or displaced persons per capita of the population of a Member State as the basis. One final point which I would like to mention, and I do not understand why Mrs Frahm does not want this, is that we must also have the option to make money available for refugee reception centres. You reject this and I simply cannot see why, because this is the first point of contact where we can provide specific help, accelerate processes and promote refugee integration. However, in all the proposed measures, we must not fail to recognise that one objective has not been addressed here, namely taking into account the distribution of the refugee burden. Please do so in implementing the measures which are necessary and positive."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph