Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-27-Speech-3-009"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060927.3.3-009"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I bring greetings from Tampere and my colleague Leena Luhtanen. I would first like to thank Mr Cavada and Mr Gargani for their enormous contribution at Tampere. We had open and concrete discussions about the development of freedom, security and justice. In connection with this, while we were there we also learnt about cycling, and Commissioner Frattini said that we have to keep pedalling so we do not fall over. It is somewhat similar with the European Union. Some of my more critical colleagues said that surely the bicycle can be stopped safely, and you can even put your feet on the ground to support yourself. I finally had to say that if the chain has come off, however, it is difficult to get going again. We should perhaps adopt the philosophy that Mr Cavada seems to espouse in what was an excellent speech.
European Council policy means that we have an obligation and a desire to examine what we might be able to do to accelerate preparations for abolishing checks at internal borders. The Finnish Presidency has promoted the drafting of the legislation on SIS II together with the European Parliament, and hopefully we will reach consensus on this in October. I would like to thank Parliament’s rapporteur, Mr Coelho, for his tough but resolute approach to finding a joint solution.
In a high-level working group in the Council, we also agreed on practical measures to try and improve coordination of the SIS II project and cooperation between national projects and preparations for the central system, which is the responsibility of the Commission.
The Finnish Presidency of the Council raised this controversial matter immediately in July, and it was also discussed last week at Tampere. At next week’s Council meeting, we will be discussing the new technical preparations timetable for the SIS II project and any realistic alternative solutions that we might have at our disposal. This should lay the groundwork for setting a target date for removing internal border controls at the December Council and in the European Council. At the December Council, the overall situation with regard to the Schengen inspections may also be examined. We will do our utmost to expand the Schengen area as quickly as possible, with no compromises on security.
The Treaty already contains provisions on procedures to help assess interpretations of cases under Title IV of the Treaty or the legality or interpretation of acts adopted by the Community’s institutions.
Under Article 67 of the Treaty, the Council, acting unanimously and having consulted the European Parliament, may adapt the provisions relating to the competence of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. This Friday the matter will be raised for the first time by the Court of Justice working party, and whether or not it will be discussed further will depend on the opinions expressed by the Member States there. The Presidency regards this as an important issue.
As we know, the citizens of the EU quite rightly expect the European Union to be able to engage in more effective cooperation in the fight against terrorism and organised crime. At the same time, we have to ensure that fundamental rights and freedoms are respected.
By virtue of the Treaty on European Union, the Council, acting unanimously and having consulted the European Parliament, may adopt the use of the bridging clause provided for in Article 42 TEU, and ‘communitarise’ police cooperation and cooperation on crime either entirely or partially. Last week in Tampere, an important debate was held on this subject between representatives of the Member States, the Commission and the European Parliament, and I particularly want to draw attention to the view firmly expressed there by Mr Cavada in the Council of Ministers, which reflects not only my own opinion but that of the European Parliament too. It was a very important addition to our debate. There was also huge support there for more effective decision-making. We are determined to continue the work in this area in accordance with the European Council’s conclusions. I wish to stress that this debate does not go against the Constitutional Treaty: we want to emphasise specifically the importance of the Treaty in the development of an area based on freedom, security and justice.
In order for progress in legal and internal matters to be visible in public security as well, we need to ensure that these acts are fully integrated into the legal systems of the Member States. During our presidential term, we will aim to develop systems to evaluate legal and internal matters, on the basis of the Commission’s communication. In addition, several peer evaluation methods have been established for matters connected with organised crime and terrorism.
Not all the Member States have yet ratified the Protocols to the Europol Convention. The Council has regularly reminded Member States of the importance of this matter. Finland trusts that the Protocol will enter into force by the end of the current year.
Closer cooperation between law enforcement authorities has been one way of trying to achieve added value in internal security in the enlarged Union. The Presidency can announce that Finland will adopt actions nationally in the near future that will permit it to become a signatory to the Prüm Treaty. Soon at least eight Member States will have signed up to this Treaty. This fulfils the minimum requirement for initiating enhanced cooperation pursuant to Article 43 of the Treaty on European Union. As the country to hold the Presidency, we will work towards making the Prüm Treaty part of the European Union’s legal system.
Cooperation in the European Union is important for strengthening the security of our citizens, and at the same time we need to ensure that basic rights and freedoms are observed. In this connection, the European Union’s ability to function, take speedy decisions and respond to changes in the operating environment is decisive.
The Council will continue its discussion on the Framework Decision on procedural rights on the basis of the Commission’s initiative. In June, the Council decided to continue its work on the basis of the compromise proposal put forward by the Presidency. This imposed greater restrictions on the number and scope of rights than did the joint proposal, focusing instead on general requirements. We are likewise aiming to bring to a conclusion the first reading of the proposal as regards its main content during the current six-month term.
Regarding racism and xenophobia, the Council has been advised that the Member States that had had general reservations about the draft instrument no longer have them. Talks can therefore start again as soon as possible.
The European Union has developed a joint policy on immigration, border control and asylum on the basis of the Tampere European Council and the Hague Programme. It is founded on the solidarity of the Member States, mutual trust and shared responsibility. It takes full account of human and fundamental rights, including the Geneva Convention on Refugees and the right to seek asylum in the European Union. Member States and their authoritative bodies are responsible for controlling their external borders and immigration and carrying out asylum-seeking procedures.
During the Finnish Presidency so far, the Council has aimed to have a comprehensive debate on immigration questions. This was the case both at the July Council and at the informal ministerial meeting in Tampere last week. Recent events in the Canary Islands and the Mediterranean highlight the destiny that the countries of Europe share and the need for commitment on the part of all the Member States. It is essential that the Union’s institutions – the European Parliament, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Co-operation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex), the Commission, and other competent bodies – act in a spirit of cooperation and coordination.
The European Union needs to step up its efforts to give practical support to Member States that bear the greatest burden when it comes to the number of illegal immigrants arriving. In connection with this, the Presidency presented its initiative on extended European solidarity at the meeting in Tampere. Under the initiative, in return for a financial contribution from the EU, procedures would be put in place to ensure that Member States adhere to jointly agreed rules and take responsibility for illegal immigrants and asylum seekers entering their territory. The debate on the President’s initiative is to continue, on the basis of the very positive discussions at Tampere.
Development aid from the European Union and the Member States is crucial to eliminating the reasons for illegal migration. The crisis in the Mediterranean now at last shows us how important external relations are in the fight against illegal migration. The Global Approach to Migration and the principal measures focusing on Africa and the Mediterranean region, adopted by the European Council last December, provide a common framework within which the EU can act. This will strengthen cooperation between the Member States and increase dialogue with the countries of Africa and cooperation in the Mediterranean region as a whole. The European Council has asked the Commission to report back on the progress made by the end of this year.
A number of important initiatives have come out of the Global Approach. These include the ministerial meeting in Rabat in July, the initiatives by Frontex to develop Mediterranean coastal surveillance, and special operations to help Spain and Malta. The Presidency is promoting these initiatives, as well as the very important Commission proposal for a Regulation for establishing Rapid Border Intervention Teams (the ‘Rabit’ Regulation).
One of the Finnish Presidency’s main priorities is to develop a system for the integrated control of external borders and the adoption of a strategy on this. Furthermore, the Commission will be examining the relevant questions in the communication on illegal immigration presented in July coherently and thoroughly.
In order to fulfil the aims on illegal immigration set out at Tampere, a number of acts have already been passed which apply to the status of people long resident in a country, family reunification, granting residence permits to the victims of human trafficking, and admission for the purposes of study, vocational training, voluntary work and scientific research. Last January, the Commission adopted a policy plan on legal immigration in accordance with the mandate in the Hague Programme. This also takes account of the Lisbon Programme adopted in July last year.
Another major step forward is the framework programme on solidarity and management of migration flows for the period 2007-2013 and the four funds to be established under it: the European Refugee Fund, the External Borders Fund, the European Return Fund and the European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals. The Council is working towards an agreement at first reading with the European Parliament on these important instruments.
The policy line taken at the European Council in Tampere in 1999 means that there have to continue to be high levels of cooperation between the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council. The Finnish Presidency wants to promote the new Tampere spirit.
The Presidency realises that the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning third country nationals who are illegally resident is very important for a common repatriation policy, but we are also aware of the issues that have to be resolved in order to reach a compromise on the proposals within a reasonable period of time. In partnership with the European Parliament and the Commission, the Council has already decided to intensify the debate to bring deliberations on the proposal to a conclusion.
On the matter of asylum, a discussion on how current EU asylum rules might be improved is expected to be launched. The Commission is to draft a Green Paper on the future of the common European asylum system. This was also discussed at Tampere. It is the goal of the Presidency to ensure that the current minimum standards are transformed into genuine common rules on asylum and subsidiary protection. Practical cooperation between Member States on asylum issues also needs to be reinforced. The Council is expecting the Commission to put forward its proposal on this matter. The Council is also expecting the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal in the near future with regard to extending long-term residential status to refugees and to those who have gained subsidiary protection status.
Increased transparency in the work of the Union is a key aim. In June, the European Council agreed on measures to enhance transparency. The Finnish Presidency stresses the vital importance of transparency, and proposes actively to take forward the debate on transparency on the basis of the Green Paper. The transparency banner was also waved vigorously at Tampere.
Finally, with regard to the secret detention facilities mentioned in a speech by the President of the United States of America in early September, I wish to reassure Parliament that the Council is aware of the possible implications. At a sitting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council in September, ministers expressed their commitment to combating terrorism effectively using all the legal means and tools available to them. Terrorism is simply a threat to a system of values based on the rule of law.
Human rights and humanitarian standards have to be adhered to in the fight against terrorism. As I said at a meeting in August in London, not one victory must go to terrorism or to their efforts to undermine our fundamental rights and values. At the JHA Council in July, I said that I thought it was essential that the Member States should also encourage a report on CIA flights carrying prisoners to be produced, in order to strengthen the basis of more confidential and viable cooperation on security.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am sorry that my speech has gone on for so long, but I have been involved in parliamentary work for 24 years now. When you get a chance to speak to such an agreeable gathering, you can feel like saying a bit too much, but I would like to say in conclusion that our citizens expect the European Union to deliver security, more effective decision-making and the ability to respond to new challenges as a matter of course. They will also insist that we should be able to fight organised crime and terrorism and control migration flows and our common external borders effectively. It is our responsibility and a challenge to parliamentary competence, both in the European Parliament and the national parliaments, to respond together to the demand being made of Europe that it should be a fair and safe place for everyone to live.
The protection of fundamental rights is a priority. All the Member States are parties to the European Convention on Human Rights, and the work of the Council constantly reflects the importance of guaranteeing that the principles contained in it are upheld. This also obviously applies to such sensitive issues as combating terrorism. I would emphasise that these values are acknowledged in all areas, both in internal action and in relations with third countries. Particular attention is being paid to establishing a European Fundamental Rights Agency. Discussions on a Council Regulation establishing the proposed Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union have begun, and the work has now reached an important phase. The Finnish Presidency will be making a determined effort to have this agency set up by the beginning of next year.
An important question that was raised is whether the Agency should also act in areas now covered under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union. The Presidency particularly wants to focus on exploring the Agency’s competences under the third pillar. To this end, we hope that the Member States will demonstrate flexibility, so that we might find a solution that satisfies everyone.
Last autumn, we had constructive talks on the Data Retention Directive, in what was a difficult situation, to look at its technical, legal and financial aspects. We were soon in a position to address the main concerns of the Member States and the European Parliament. I think that this is a splendid example of how decisions can be taken by a qualified majority, but at the same time the aim is to reach a consensus. Thus encouraged, we would like to adopt the Framework Decision on the protection of personal data under the third pillar as quickly as possible. We aim to conclude the first reading of the proposal during the current six-month term. The Council is now carefully considering the European Parliament’s opinion on this proposal.
The abolition of checks at internal borders – that is, the expansion of the Schengen area – is an important political objective for creating an area in the European Union based on freedom. The Schengen evaluation process launched at the beginning of this year has already made it possible to carry out comprehensive evaluations of police and visa cooperation in the new Member States, as well as data protection at land and sea borders and at airports.
The new Member States must meet all the conditions for applying the Schengen
. This also implies the existence of a viable Schengen Information System.
The inspections arranged for this year are now well underway. We will be reviewing the results in December and then deciding on further measures. Some time ago, we received a report from the Commission concerning the delayed technical progress of the SIS II system. Measures and timetables relating to this must be examined openly and honestly in the light of the latest information."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples