Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-01-Speech-1-090"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080901.18.1-090"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I would like to thank the Commissioner for his kind words. The European Parliament is involved in a co-determination process for amending the regulation governing the use of the Visa Information System. The amendments to the visa system proposed by the Commission initially envisaged a very thorough control of the entry of third-country citizens needing a visa. This would involve not only the usual procedure of matching the person to the document, but also fingerprinting. The regulation contains all the search measures and conditions for the appropriate authorities managing the controls at external border crossings to access data for checking identity and so on – I will refrain from listing all these checks.
In accordance with this regulation, the border official has access to the Visa Information System, where he can check all the data on the passenger at the border, including fingerprints. The proposed regulation, that is to say a systematic checking with fingerprinting of third-country citizens every time (I emphasise every time) they enter the Schengen area, would certainly prolong the waiting time at border crossings, especially during the tourist season and at the beginning and end of public holidays.
Since Europe is a global economic power as well as an interesting tourist destination for third-country citizens, who of course need entry visas, in my opinion it is, or was, necessary to ease the regulation appropriately. That is why I proposed random checking and fingerprinting at border crossings. I thereby wanted to draw attention to the fact that the visa holder was fingerprinted once in the process of obtaining a visa, and then again on entering the Schengen area for the purpose of comparison and verification of identity.
I think that such an operation or such a rigid provision is an exaggeration because we actually have no data on, or estimates of, the numbers of forged visas. On top of that, fingerprinting totally unsuspicious people is senseless and time-consuming. Despite separate lanes for citizens of the European Union, very long queues would form at border crossings where everyone, namely citizens of the European Union and those with visas, would be queuing during public holidays and vacations.
In this session of Parliament we have managed, relatively quickly, to reach a consensus on certain deviations from such rigid provisions, and a compromise with the Council and the Commission was also reached after two trialogues. The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs approved the proposal with a large majority, there being no votes against and only two abstentions.
In brief, I think that the current regulation is good because it ensures a smooth border crossing. Even when there are many people queuing, the border official makes his own assessment in accordance with the regulation and, if conditions dictate, carries out a random check. The decision to carry out random checks is not a matter for the official alone, but primarily for his superiors at the border. I think we have ensured appropriate safety standards and at the same time enabled passengers to cross the border in the shortest possible time.
Allow me to take this opportunity to thank the Council and the Commission for their excellent cooperation, and especially the shadow rapporteurs, in particular Mr Cashman, for a number of good ideas and their active search for a compromise."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples