Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-03-Speech-3-035"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011003.2.3-035"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the MPF delegation members approve both the ‘solidarity and cooperation with the United States’ and the ‘European policy’ headings of the action plan against terrorism adopted by the extraordinary European Council of 21 September. However, we feel the practical value of introducing a European arrest warrant and a common definition of terrorism have been rather overestimated. Similarly, it may seem a good idea in theory to give Europol new powers, but this organisation is not doing very well as it is and first we would have to call for an independent and objective audit of the way it operates. But these are all secondary issues. Overall, we approve the Council's conclusions. In particular, we welcome the establishment of Eurojust, which is to develop forms of judicial and police cooperation and create synergy between the existing systems instead of trying to demolish them. Like the Council, we also call for the speedy ratification of all existing international conventions, like the convention on the financing of terrorism, whose implementation has been seriously delayed.
However, in spite of all that, Mr President, we are still not happy. That brings me to my main point.
Although the Council adopted long lists of actions to be undertaken, they remain one-off measures and the European Union is still not really prepared to examine its own conscience. It would be difficult to deny that the inquiry into the 11 September attacks is currently concentrating on Europe and that it shows that, for years now, the terrorists have been centring their preparations in Europe, which they have used as their base. All this is not pure chance. The day after the attacks, a French newspaper interviewed the current president of Eurojust, Mrs Coninsx, asking her the following question, and I quote from the article: ‘is the loose Islamist conglomeration strongly established in Europe?’ Mrs Coninsx, head of Eurojust, replied: ‘Europe may act as a logistical fallback for these terrorists. It is, indeed, fairly easy to cross frontiers because of the Schengen area’.
Everyone knows that. It is true for the terrorists, but it is also true for fissile materials, it is true for stolen works of art, it is true for illegal immigrants, etc. In fact it was only yesterday and in this very place that I accused the Commission of all too often concealing the problems of illegal immigration. Europol informs us that 500 000 illegal immigrants enter EU territory every year, a figure that I actually think is an underestimate. At any rate, it means that millions of foreigners live on our soil permanently and illegally. So let me ask you: if countries let in millions of foreigners without discovering them and allow them to live there illegally, can they be regarded as in control of their territory? Obviously you will all say ‘no’.
It is now up to the Council, and the Council alone, to issue strong instructions in order to restore some balance. The President of the Council has rightly said that the fight against terrorism will be global and sustained. We have to draw all the necessary conclusions from that, discard outdated points of view, give priority to security, review all the old strategies that are no longer appropriate and begin by admitting that controls do not prejudice freedom of movement; while they harm criminals they protect citizens' freedoms.
The Council must, therefore, call immediately for a list of all the documents that need reviewing from a security point of view and, in particular, that disastrous Article 62(1) of the Treaty of Amsterdam, which promises a total absence of any kind of control of individuals at the internal frontiers five years after its entry into force.
We need a general review plan, of which the Council must be directly in charge. That means we need to review Article 67 of the Treaty of Amsterdam..."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples