Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-130"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010313.11.2-130"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-03-13-Speech-2-1312
lpv:speaker	lp:Georges Berthu2
lpv:spokenAs	member; NA (2001-01-31--2004-07-19)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Canada (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Mouvement pour la France (2000-11-23--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". I voted against the Commission's proposal on temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of persons fleeing upheavals of various kinds in third countries. I had already set out serious objections during the debate and now the European Parliament's amendments have only made matters worse, as, incidentally, have the explanations given by the Commission. In particular, the proposal for a directive seemed to recognise the fact that a Member State cannot have a quota of refugees imposed on it against its will. However, Commissioner Vitorino has just presented the situation quite differently. According to him, Article 25 does indeed provide that a Member State can declare itself unable to take in these persons, but it will have to justify that declaration and the justification must be genuinely exceptional. Moreover, he pointed out that the decision to introduce the temporary protection system was taken by a qualified majority, implying that a Member State that declared itself unable to take in refugees could not have a right of veto. The European Parliament went even further by adopting amendments that make it totally impossible for a Member State to dissociate itself from a majority decision on the physical allocation of these refugees. Moreover, the European Parliament endorsed the Commission's proposals on organising the situation of temporary refugees as though they were to remain in the host country for good, in particular by accepting the right of families to be reunited. We believe that every Member State must remain master of its own territory, that it cannot have the presence of unwanted foreigners imposed on it, and that while there may be cases where it is necessary to give temporary protection, it must be given mainly with an eye to the repatriation of the persons concerned."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph