Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-19-Speech-1-130"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-10-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Progress of SIS II and VIS (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"hu"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091019.19.1-130"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-10-19-Speech-1-1312
lpv:speaker	lp:Edit Bauer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; FEMM (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2012-02-02)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Strana mad'arskej komunity- Magyar Közösség Pártja (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Commissioner, in 2006, when the new Member States were waiting to join the Schengen area, we stipulated, and it was stipulated to us, that one of the conditions was that SIS II had to be in operation. In the meantime, it transpired that the system would be unable to operate at all. We then heard that the floor was not strong enough to support the weight of the technical equipment and certainly, if the Portuguese Presidency had not come up with a solution for operating the ‘SIS one for all’ system, the eight new Member States would still have been waiting to join the Schengen area even now. Meanwhile, we should remember that new contracts had to be signed, new financial packages had to be found for developing the SIS II system, while the operation of the SIS I+ system still has to be financed. Therefore, in practical terms, we are financing two systems, which is costing European taxpayers no small sum of money. We are obviously talking about a large investment when it comes to safeguarding European citizens’ safety. Unlike my left-wing fellow Member, I feel that it can bring about a huge change in terms of quality for the benefit of European security. I am also curious about the delay given that in 2001, the system’s development was planned to take five years, from 2002 to 2007. We are now talking about it being developed perhaps over 10 years. Commissioner, it is not possible to have such a degree of uncertainty with a technical system that its development time doubles. We are well aware that technical gremlins can throw a spanner in the works and that public investment has been delayed, but we ultimately need to ask the question: what is the reason behind this? Are not some countries, some Member States in fact, deliberately stalling the SIS II system’s development? To simply conclude my question, what guarantee is there that we will not have the same story with the VIS system?"@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph