Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-02-03-Speech-2-059"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090203.5.2-059"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
For years, the European Union has had to contend with the presence of millions of illegal immigrants on its territory, and the pressure to find a solution is mounting. This pressure is considerable, and rightly so, frankly. Indeed, if we wish to adopt manageable and reliable migration policy, in which refugees are entitled to protection and in which we create transparent opportunities for legal migration, then an approach that takes due account of all discouraging and encouraging factors that lead to illegal immigration is a necessary measure.
Last summer, the Council and Parliament reached agreement on what was known as the Return Directive, which mainly focuses on the illegal immigrants themselves, whereas today, we are looking at the employers who do not hesitate to employ illegal immigrants. This is not only a significant inducement for illegal immigrants, but also unmistakeably creates cases of abuse and gross exploitation.
The importance of harmonised European policy is, in my view, beyond dispute. After all, when internal borders are non-existent, Member State A may worry itself silly, but if Member State B barely addresses the employment of illegal immigrants, if at all, then Member State A will remain nothing but a voice in the wilderness.
After a rather slow start, there is now, following intense negotiations with the Council, a compromise before us that is acceptable to me, and I would like to thank the rapporteur for his constructive and pragmatic way of working. It was like a breath of fresh air which, in fact, cannot be said of a few of his fellow MEPs who now insist, at any price, on this accompanying written declaration, a show for the
which does not do much for the image of this Parliament. That too, my group will accept.
Moreover, it should be clear that, once this directive has been adopted, it is up to the Member States to galvanise themselves into action. It should be clear that neither the European Commission nor the European Parliament have magic wands at their disposal when it comes to decisiveness or enforcement. The Council was emphatically opposed to a binding percentage of inspections, and this is exactly where the problem often lies – as has been said by many in this Parliament, as well as the Commissioner. All I can do now is urge you to turn this enforcement into reality so as to ensure that we do not get bogged down with empty words on paper once more as, indeed, nobody benefits from this.
The proposal is again a step in the right direction when it comes to achieving comprehensive migration policy. We still have a long way to go though, so what we must do now is persevere. In this connection, I would like to ask the 64 thousand dollar question that has been on everybody’s lips today: why is the Council absent from this debate? This is, quite frankly, unacceptable, in my view."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Bühne"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples