Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-068"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.3.2-068"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, for the first time ever in this Parliament we are talking about economic migration and asylum in distinct and separate terms, which could be considered to be a wise move by the European Commission in its respective communications for it will help us to give the debate a sense of order and clarity. This was one of Parliament’s requests that has now become reality.
I would like to briefly share two thoughts with you on the issues that are the subject of this debate: firstly, that the migratory movements toward Europe we are now seeing correspond to a mass exodus of citizens who, in their own countries, do not enjoy the minimum conditions necessary for survival and who are being tragically exploited by the organised mafias who traffic in them. This has already been discussed here in Parliament. The cases in Dover and on our own Andalusian coast are clear examples of this.
However, illegal immigration of this nature is fertile ground for the social exclusion of this immigrant population and for the exploitation of their labour, in addition to the outbreaks of xenophobia and racism that are taking place in certain parts of Europe. This problem can only be resolved by close cooperation and collaboration with the countries of origin, otherwise, any policy in this field will be condemned to failure.
Community programmes such as PHARE, TACIS, MEDA, or the immigration and asylum action plans themselves are absolutely necessary. Yet at the same time, and I would like to put particular emphasis on this point, it must also be stressed, from a political angle in particular, that the countries of origin should make the most of their natural and human resources and, most of all, guarantee political and social stability so that their citizens can have confidence in their own leaders. This is, therefore, an issue of shared responsibility and not only the responsibility of the Member States or of the European Union itself. Countries such as Morocco, Algeria or Tunisia are an example of what I have just been referring to.
On the other hand, with regard to the communication on the common asylum procedure, the main problem with which Member States are confronted is that of asylum seekers whose claims are unfounded. The Commission and this Parliament should, therefore, make a great effort to remove the major obstacles blocking the standardisation of solutions between Member States.
On this subject, it does not seem to be the right occasion to talk about a common procedure, distinct from the mandate contained in the Treaty of Amsterdam that refers to a common asylum procedure. It is not the same. Furthermore, both the communication and the Evans report fail to define concepts such as persecution by third parties, persecution in cases of conflict or gender related persecution, for example, given that the difficulty sometimes lies more in the definition of the concept of the refugee than in the process of identifying it.
To be precise, we are on the right track: faced with a phenomenon such as asylum and immigration, a concern for many of us, cooperation, solidarity, clear legislation and realism are the necessary prerequisites for addressing one of the major challenges for the European Union in this new century."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples