Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-139"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.7.3-139"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, although the Commission has presented all the proposals required by the Treaty 18 months ahead of the deadline set by the Treaty of Amsterdam, it is true that only a few of the objectives defined for the establishment of a common asylum and migration policy have effectively been met.
I would like to take this occasion to confirm that the Commission will put forward a proposal in 2003 with the aim of establishing a multiannual programme of cooperation with third countries in the field of migration, working on the experience that we have gained on the basis of the use of budget line B7-667. Our intention is to respond in a specific and complementary way to the needs of third countries in their efforts to ensure better management of all aspects of migratory flows and to stimulate them in their preparation for implementation of the readmission agreements or to assist them in the implementation itself. This programme complements other Community cooperation and development instruments.
The degree of harmonisation attained or currently being negotiated has often failed to meet the Commission's expectations. Certainly more could have been done. However, the harmonisation being attained is worth our effort. Those of us involved in the formulation of this policy should not forget that we have been pioneers in laying the first building blocks of European legislation and policy on such a difficult subject as migration and asylum, and Parliament most of all.
Nevertheless, this first attempt at building a policy has also taught us a few lessons. This policy is still encumbered by too many institutional and legal constraints, as the President-in-Office was commenting in his remarks on conventions.
Codecision should become the norm and general provisions should allow the Commission to formulate a fully harmonised policy. The objective should not be simply the achievement of minimum standards but a fully common asylum system. Unanimity in the Council – especially in view of an enlarged Union – appears more and more to be an invitation to stalemate. Therefore, I am very pleased with the constructive conclusions reached by the Bruton report within the framework of the Convention. They point in the right direction as to the future of European policy on asylum and migration. I am sure that those conclusions will receive the full endorsement of the European Parliament.
I hope that the Council will continue to press ahead quickly with the examination and adoption of the several measures under discussion, as the European Council requested at both Laeken and Seville. I recognise that under the Danish presidency significant progress was made, not only as far as the Seville conclusions are concerned, but in particular on the development of the common asylum policy. This progress was due to the personal engagement and knowledge of Mr Haarder, whom I praise for that.
In fact, the Dublin II regulation is expected to be formally adopted in the Justice and Home Affairs Council tomorrow. Together with the start of operation of the Eurodac system, which is scheduled for 15 January 2003, this will constitute a positive step forward.
I am fairly optimistic about the discussions in the Council on the directive laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers in Member States. I share the President-in-Office's view that it is possible for the Council to have this directive adopted tomorrow.
Thanks to the adoption of this legislation, the first phase of the common European asylum system is progressively taking shape. Two main elements of the system are still to be adopted. However, as the President-in-Office said, good progress was made, thanks to an energetic Danish presidency, on a common definition of 'refugee' and a common approach to subsidiary protection. Little remains to be done on this key proposal which could be adopted by the Council at its first meeting in 2003. I also expect the Council to speed up the examination of our amended proposal on asylum procedures, which we presented six months ago.
It is of the utmost importance for the credibility of the Union in these areas, which are at the heart of public opinion's expectations about Europe, that substantive progress is really achieved. In such sensitive policy areas, the strategy of small steps will prove to be efficient and win the confidence of our citizens. Moreover, the time has come to consider seriously the forward-looking ideas that were recently presented by the High Commissioner, Ruud Lubbers, and which have been blessed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Executive Committee. In early 2003 the Commission intends to put forward a communication where we will express our own views on the main elements of this new agenda for protection presented by Mr Lubbers.
As you know – and as already mentioned by the President-in-Office – the directives on family reunification and long-term residence status are still under examination. I encourage the incoming Greek presidency to finalise these negotiations as soon as possible. It is possible to have them adopted during the first half of next year.
The rules on admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of employment, presented by the Commission in July 2001, have now been complemented by a new proposal, presented in October, on the conditions for entry and residence for study purposes. Urgent progress is needed on these two texts, which are key elements for an active EU immigration policy.
Moreover, with regard to international relations, the Commission has recently put forward, on a joint proposal by myself and my colleagues, Mr Patten and Mr Nielson, a communication presenting our views on the nexus between migration and development. In this document we also elaborate on the possibilities, but also the limitations, of the Community budget in this area."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples