Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-08-Speech-2-269"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030408.7.2-269"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I wanted first of all to congratulate my colleague, Carmen Cerdeira, on the excellent work that she has done on this very important issue. Indeed this text constitutes the first directive on legal immigration since competence for this area moved to European level.
I should like to say straight away, however, that I regret two things: firstly, that we have had to wait so long; secondly, that the end result is such a cautious position, the unfortunate consequence of a policy that is based exclusively on controlling migratory flows, despite the objectives set in Tampere.
After more than three years of fierce negotiations, after two markedly different proposals, despite a European Parliament opinion expressing support for the first proposal and despite the excellent work done by our rapporteur, the text that we have today contains minimal provisions on family reunification and, moreover, the Council will take absolutely no account at all of the European Parliament's opinion, which will nevertheless – at least, I hope so – confirm our previous position. Tampere had, it is true, given us a glimpse of something entirely different, but at this stage it is unfortunately a certainty that the process that was begun in 1999 is turning out contrary to expectations. Parliament really must vote in favour of Mrs Cerdeira's report tomorrow and in so doing clearly express its rejection of a fortress Europe, of the kind that is in the process of being created, and it must also clearly declare its support for the right to live in a family, which is an absolutely essential right in all of our democracies.
That is why we will be voting against – and we are against – the provision that allows the Member States, in certain cases, to refuse entry to a child aged over 12 years.
We also reject the proposal that authorises a waiting period of three years and we are unfortunately obliged to note that this episode constitutes yet more proof of the lack of political will on the part of the Member States to share competence for immigration.
It is not by adopting this kind of overcautious attitude that we are going to resolve the problem of illegal immigration; nor is this the way to avoid secondary movements of asylum seekers, which is nevertheless one of the main objectives of this directive.
In short, with the various steps backward in the second directive and the various …
... we are a very long way from achieving the objectives set in 1999 by the Tampere Summit for bringing this field within the Community system as such."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(The President invited the speaker to conclude)"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples