Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-05-Speech-4-013"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-12-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Short-term residence permits2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021205.1.4-013"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-12-05-Speech-4-0142
lpv:speaker	lp:Johannes Blokland2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; ChristenUnie - Staatkundig Gereformeerde Parti (2002-03-18--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 co-chair; EDD (2001-01-30--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the Commission’s proposal is a creditable attempt as a Union, to get a better grip on smuggling of human beings and trafficking in human beings. The circumstances under which people enter countries illegally are tragic and degrading. All legal means must be used to tackle the criminals who show no mercy in their quest to earn big money. The means proposed here can make a contribution to this. Similar legislation for victims of trafficking in human beings was successfully introduced in the Netherlands some years ago. Mrs Sörensen however immediately puts her finger on the weak point in the Commission’s proposal. The definition ‘victims of action to facilitate illegal immigration’ is unclear. She proposes following the lead of the UN protocol against smuggling of migrants and using the term ‘victims of smuggling of human beings’. The Commission is opposed to following this lead precisely in order to prevent misunderstandings. This directive in fact affects a different group of people from those in the UN protocol. The directive is only concerned with those who can reasonably be regarded as victims and who have experienced harm such as threat to life or assault on their physical integrity. I understand this reasoning, but think that the Commission’s definition will provide for at least as many misunderstandings. In effect we are talking about the same terms. The problem is just that the term must bring to the fore that the people concerned have suffered disproportionate harm. Mrs Sörensen tries to solve this by proposing the term ‘victims of smuggling of human beings resulting in exploitation’. This term does not fit the bill either however because what happens then to the physical harm the Commission is talking about? Both definitions threaten to lead to abuse of the regulation. The Council must consider carefully whether the offence of smuggling of human beings should be included in the directive in this way. Especially as legislation in this area exists only in Spain. I should also like to note that the deletion of Article 12 does not seem to me to be a good idea. Access to the labour market, to vocational training and education is just one part of what this system should set up. If it is omitted, what reason does the victim then have to cooperate with proceedings against the smugglers of human beings and traffickers in human beings? It is precisely through the opportunity to earn a little money and to receive some training that in the end you give them more opportunities in their homeland and you also give the homeland itself more opportunities."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph