Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-017"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-09-27"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050927.4.2-017"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-09-27-Speech-2-0182
lpv:speaker	lp:Johannes Blokland2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; TRAN (2004-09-15--2007-01-14)3 member; LIBE (2004-09-14--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2004-11-18--2006-12-12)3 vice-chair; ENVI (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 treasurer; IND/DEM (2004-07-26--2007-02-12)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; ChristenUnie - Staatkundig Gereformeerde Parti (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, today, we are debating refugee status; in a world in which millions of people are on the run, we are fortunate enough to be able to discuss their status. Let it be clear that talking about refugees from our position cannot, and indeed should not, be without any consequences. It is our duty to treat refugees kindly and fairly. One and a half weeks ago, it became painfully clear once again how little prepared we in the European Union are to provide clarity and transparency in respect of refugee treatment. I fear that Lampedusa is no exception. An even-handed and fair European asylum policy can only exist if the Member States are open about the way they treat their refugees. The amendments that have been tabled to Mr Kreissl-Dörfler’s report show no evidence of any priorities having been set. If this Parliament had wanted to express clear requests, we would have been better off sticking to the main points. Instead, alongside the Council’s political agreement, this House has produced a very extensive document. In a consultation procedure, there is little scope for re-writing a Council proposal. I would like to make two important points. This proposal makes it possible for an application for asylum to be rejected on the basis of a combination of different exceptions. Member States are apparently not prepared to allow their own exceptions to be discussed in order to reach an even-handed directive, and that is unacceptable. Moreover, there are insufficient guarantees in the directive to accompany the accelerated procedure. There is a lack of both clear criteria and sufficient guarantees that this procedure will not be at the expense of the fairness of the normal procedure. One important point is what the Council intends to do with Parliament’s amendments; it is very regrettable that the Council is not present to set that out in detail, which is what I would like it to do. Commissioner Frattini doubts whether the Council is prepared to adopt any amendments from Parliament. It should be possible, though, to enter into a dialogue with the Council on a limited number of points that we regard as essential."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph