Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-20-Speech-2-667-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-11-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Possible delays to the start of the operation of SIS II (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121120.35.2-667-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-11-20-Speech-2-668-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Baroness Sarah Ludford2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, oh dear, SIS II has been hit by the curse of large IT projects, especially in the field of home affairs! We are rather familiar with this in the UK, but another thing we are getting familiar with in the UK is the desire of europhobes – and we might hear from one shortly – to opt out of key EU justice and home affairs measures. What a mistake that would be! I look forward to the UK finally taking part in the Schengen Information System. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Coelho, not only for all his work on Schengen on this particular dossier but also for his flexibility when the Council proposed having a separate legal instrument to ensure the participation of the UK and Ireland in the policing aspects of the SIS. They cannot, of course, take part in the immigration and border control parts of the system, but I am pleased to say that the UK is keen to be involved in the policing aspects. It would have been great had this measure been ready before the London Olympics as there was some concern that the fact of the UK not yet being hooked up would make it difficult to identify criminals or terrorists. I am glad to say we had a safe London Olympics, but nonetheless it was a pity that the deadline was missed. The UK has been preparing for a number of years to connect to SIS II. It is responsible for 18% of the total charge to the EU budget as well as the domestic costs. The consequences of opting out of SIS II are obvious: the UK would not only lose its considerable investment but would also be unable to make use of a system that has proved a very valuable law-enforcement tool. Without access to SIS II, the UK would not have access to alerts issued by other Member States in order, for example, to locate and apprehend criminals who escape into the UK from one of the other Schengen countries. Neither could the UK issue a SIS alert in order to locate a suspect who had left the UK, or a car stolen in the UK and driven abroad. While the UK authorities could still request assistance from other Member States’ authorities on an ad hoc basis, this would be much slower and more cumbersome than the automated and immediate exchange through SIS II. I cannot understand those British politicians and their hangers-on who want the UK to opt out of this means to keep the British people safe and secure."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; DROI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; ALDE (2012-07-04--2014-06-30)3 substitute; CRIM (2012-03-28--2013-10-23)3 unknown; Liberal Democrats Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Sarah Ludford,"1 "on behalf of the ALDE Group"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph