Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-07-Speech-4-242"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020207.14.4-242"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, clearly we are having trouble applying one of the basic principles of a free Europe, the principle of the free movement of goods. Numerous approaches have been voiced, from the possibility of invoking articles in the Treaty to intervention by the Commission to persuade the French government to act more quickly. The current legislation of the European Union allows the Commission to institute infringement proceedings against a Member State found to be obstructing the free movement of goods.
However, these proceedings are subject to strict criteria when the obstacle is created by a few private individuals and the Commission can only act if the authorities in question fail to take the necessary measures. This clearly does not apply in the present case. Serious efforts are being made, contacts between the Commission and the French government have proven useful and we shall continue to work along these lines. The French government has already closed the site in question, a study has been carried out and initial efforts have been made to install the technology required but, of course, the level of policing, the number of police officers required and the installation of the high-tech equipment needed are matters for the French government.
The second point I should like to make brings us to the root of the problem. Why has traffic been suspended? Why are there constantly problems with train traffic through the tunnel? Why are illegal immigrants trespassing on various sites used by rail freight transporters? I think, as several Members have said, that the root of the problem is to be found in common European policy; we need a common asylum policy to discourage immigrants from trying to reach specific Member States.
So the Commission has already tabled a number of proposals on procedures and rules for granting refugee status and minimum common requirements for receiving asylum seekers. Another proposal sets criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining asylum applications. These proposals stipulate that, if an asylum seeker remains in one Member State for an extended period, then that Member State is responsible for examining the asylum application. This means, in this particular case, that asylum seekers will be unable to acquire refugee status in Britain after an extended period in France.
So I think that, when it comes to finding an immediate solution to a problem which is having a significant impact on certain areas, especially remote areas in Scotland, as well as on the European continent, and on trade relations with Great Britain, the French government alone is responsible. It needs to take action as quickly as possible to complete the plan submitted and it is working with Great Britain and the Commission in order to do so. As far as a long-term solution to the problem is concerned because, as numerous Members have said today, the problem today may be on the border between France and Great Britain, but tomorrow it could well surface somewhere else in Europe, we need a fast decision on a common asylum policy at European level."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples