Activities of Angel DZHAMBAZKI related to 2015/2095(INI)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (76)
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas solidarity can take the forms of internal and external solidarity; and whereas relocation, mutual recognition of asylum decisions, operational support measures, a pro-active interpretation of the current Dublin Regulation and the Temporary Protection Directive are all tools for internal solidarity, while resettlement, humanitarian admission and search and rescue at sea promote external solidarity;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas ineffective management of external borders should invoke automatic sanctions, i.e. the suspension, and where appropriate the loss, of Schengen membership of the EU Member State involved;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the current Visa Code already allows Member States to deviate from the normal admissibility criteria for a vissue visas based ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25); however, notes that there is a application ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25)clear distinction between legal and economic migration, on the one side, and those seeking refuge and asylum, on the other side;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
K a. whereas, unless the EU Coast and Border Guard's Return Office systematically performs push-backs to safe harbours, the EU's external borders would not actually be guarded and the influx would not be stemmed;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas safe and legal routes for refugees to access the EU are limited, and many continue to take the risk of embarking on dangerous routes; and whereas the creation of new safe and lawful routes for asylum seekers and refugees to enter the EU, building on existing legislation and practices, would allow the EU and the Member States to have a better overview of the protection needs and of the inflowmassive and uncontrolled influx of economic migrants and asylum seekers needs to be addressed first, before new legal routes into the EU cand to undermine the business model of the smugglers be explored;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas EU-third country cooperation is developed through political instruments such as regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, common agendas for migration and mobility and mobility partnerships, through legal instruments such as migration clauses in ‘global agreements’, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements and visa exemption agreements, and through operational instruments such as Regional Protection Programmes (RPP), Regional Development and Protection Programmes (RDPP), Frontex working arrangements and EASO cooperation with third countries; notes that at present readmission agreements with a number of third countries are proving to be ineffective, and the EU should seek to be more ambitious in their implementation and the creation of further agreements following the Valletta Summit;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
P a. whereas many Syrian, Eritrean and other asylum seekers had de facto protection in Turkey, before coming to the EU;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Recital P b (new)
P b. whereas, according to articles 33 in juncto 35 of the Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU, i.e. the principle of the first country of asylum, the application of an asylum seeker who had de jure or de facto protection outside the EU can be declared inadmissible, in order to return this person back to that host country;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas the working-age population in the EU is projected to decline by 7.5 million by 2020; whereas projecird-country nationals face many difficulties in obtaining recognitions onf the development of labour market needs in the EU points to emerging and future shortages in specific fields; and whereas third-country nationals face many difficulties in obtainingir skills and foreign qualifications, whereas a better recognition of their foreign qualifications, and therefore tend to be over-qualified for their job goes hand in hand with the screening of skills;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas the existing fragmentation of budget lines and responsibilities can make it difficult to provide a comprehensive overview of how funds are used, and even to quantify exactly how much the EU spends on migration; notes that EU funds often can be slow to access for Member States in crisis situations; notes that Member States should look to make contributions through allocating experts and assets on a bilateral basis in order support frontline Member States;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas the CEAS includes a set of common rules for a common asylum policy, a uniform asylum status and common asylum procedures valid throughout the Union; whereas, however, many alerts, including the infringement decisions adopted by the Commission, show that the CEAS has not been fully implemented in many Member States; whereas implementation is essential in order to harmonise national laws and promote solidarity among Member States, and to create a system which is fair, effective, and discourages secondary movement across the EU; whereas Member States can seek supporting assistance from EASO to meet the standards required by the CEAS; whereas harmonisation of reception conditions and asylum procedures can avoid stress on countries offering better conditions and are key to responsibility sharing;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas the current mechanisms of the Dublin system have failed to be objective, to establish fair criteriaDublin system is the fundamental basis for allocating responsibility for applications for international protection and to provide swift access to protection; whereas the Dublin system is not being applied in practice, and explicit derogations have been adopted with two Council decisions on temporary relocation; and whereas the Commission has announced a proposal for a proper revision of the Dublin III Regulation by March 2016; whereas a good functioning Dublin Regulation with EU Member States being able to take on their responsibilities, is an essential component of the EU's asylum system;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that solidarity must be the principle upon which Union action on migration is based; notes thatNotes the principle of solidarity, as set out in Article 80 TFEU, which covers asylum, immigration and border control policies; takes the view that Article 80 provides a legal basis ‘jointly’ with Articles 77-79 TFEU to implement the principle of solidarity in those areastresses that solidarity goes hand in hand with the responsibility of Member States to ensure that all EU rules which have been adopted are efficiently implemented; asks the European Commission to ensure that Member States are applying the EU acquis and asks, when necessary, that the Commission makes swift and effective use of infringement procedures; stresses that good implementation of the entire EU acquis is essential to stabilize the current crisis situation within the EU, and will be more effective than ad hoc decision- making regarding the implementation of EU law, or the creation of any new "magic bullet" laws;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Starts from the premise that stabilizing the current crisis and saving lives and must be a firstA priority, and that proper funding, at Union and Member State level, for search and rescue operations is essential is essential in order to carry out search and rescue operations, and operations to combat human traffickers; notes that there has been an increase in the number of irregular arrivals by sea and an alarming increase in the number of deaths at sea, and that a better European response is still required;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that a permanent,at a robust and effective Union response into search and rescue operations at sea is crucial to preventing an escalating death toll of migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Takes the view that these search and rescue operations should be accompanied by a systematic pushback policy that brings back all intercepted migrants to safe harbours outside the EU's external borders, where their applications will be processed and from where all asylum seekers that had de facto protection outside the EU can be returned to these safe havens, in full respect of EU secondary law, the Geneva Convention 1951, the prohibition of collective expulsion and the principle of non- refoulement;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Suggests, in that respect, that search and rescue capacities must be strengthened, and that Member States’' governments mustshould deploy more resources – in terms of financial assistance and assets – in the context of a Union-wide humanitarian operation, dedicated to finding, rescuing and assisting migrants in peril and bringreturning them to the closest place of safety;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that private shipmasters or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) who genuinely assist persons in distress at sea should not risk punishment for providing such assistance; believes that merchant shipping should cannot provide an structural option in lieu of Member States and the Union fulfilling their obligations in terms of search and rescue;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Holds that any holistic approach to migration must necessarily contain measures aimed at disrupting, preventing, prosecuting and punishing the activities of criminal networks involved in the trafficking and smuggling of people; stresses that a robust EU standard should be established in order to avoid forum shopping on the part of smugglers and traffickers;
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls urgently for progress to be made in order to initiate the third and final phase of EUNAVFOR Med (Operation Sophia);
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Stresses that the EU must take action in order to disrupt human traffickers; but also the flow of money made as a consequence of this exploitative crime; notes that it is estimated that profits in excess of 20 billion euros are made from trafficking annually which often feeds into other kinds of criminality; notes that it is unfortunate that in a small number of cases, trafficking and smuggling of persons facilitates the entry of criminals; and therefore, it is essential that upon arrival all asylum seekers are fingerprinted under the EURODAC system and processed as soon as possible;
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that Member States and the EU should continue to find ways to work with third countries, EUROPOL, and the EEAS in order to identify the modus operandi an routes of criminal groups; encourage third countries to lay down the strongest possible criminal sanctions against human traffickers and smugglers; and find effective ways of patrolling international waters and preventing the departure of trafficked vessels by assisting in their legal destruction;
Amendment 378 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Takes the view that relocation mechanisms need to be subject to strict conditions, i.e. effectively protecting the E.U.'s external borders and a fair redistribution key, and be accompanied by E.U. policy allowing Member States to conduct an effective national activation and integration policy;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that, for the purposes of the Relocation Decisions, relocation will cover only those nationalities for which the proportion of positive decisions granting international protection in the Union has been 75 % or more for the preceding three months, on the basis of Eurostat data; notes that the Relocation Decisions will affect a relatively small number of people, and will leave out the large numbers of applicants originating from other third countries who cannot be relocated under those decisions; stresses therefore that it is essential that all other elements of the EU's asylum system operate effectively, and that all those individuals who do not qualify to stay in the EU are returned immediately in line with due legal process and the EU acquis;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is of the opinion that, in addition to the criteria contained in the Relocation Decisions, namely the GDP of the Member State, the population of the Member State, the unemployment rate in the Member State, and the past numbers of asylum seekers in the Member State, consideration should be given to two other criteria, namely, the size of the territory of the Member State and, the population density of the Member State and its historical migration flows;
Amendment 444 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Takes the view that resettlement is one of the preferred options for granting safe and lawful access to the Union for refugees and those in need of international protection, wherin case the refugees can neither return to their home countries nor receive effective protection or be integrated into the host countryhad safe residence in a third-country of transit;
Amendment 461 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Points out that, given the unprecedented flows of migrants that have reached and continue to reach the Union’s external borders, and the steady increase in the number of people asking for international protection, the Union needs a binding and mandatory legislative approach to resettlement, as set out in the Commission’s agenda for migration; recommends that, to have an impact, such an approach must provide for resettlement of a meaningfulaximum number of refugees, with regard to the overall numbers of refugees seeking international protection in the Unionto be determined in advance;
Amendment 467 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines that there is a need for a permanenta Union-wide resettlement programme, with mandatory participation by Member States, providing resettlement for a meaningfulaximum number of refugees, having regard to the overall number of refugees seeking protection can only be effective if accompanied by a systematic push-back policy in the Union;
Amendment 488 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Points out that humanitarian admission can be used as a complement to resettlement in order to give urgent protection, often on a temporary basis, to the most vulnerable where needed, e.g. unaccompanied minors or refugees with disabilities; calls upon Member States to look to national provisions to provide temporary humanitarian protection;
Amendment 490 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 502 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that humanitarian visas provide persons in need of international protection with means of accessing a third country in order to apply for asylum; calls on the Member States to make use of any existing possibilities to provide for humanitarian visas at Union embassies and consular offices in countries of origin or transit countries; however, stresses that humanitarian visas should be dealt with in a separate instrument, and not included in EU Visa laws;
Amendment 516 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Points out that further steps and better implementation are necessary to ensure that the CEAS becomes a truly uniform system;
Amendment 525 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recalls that a comprehensive assessment (in the form of the Commission’'s evaluation reports) of the implementation of this package, followed by a speedy follow-up in case implementation is unsatisfactory in certain Member States, is absolutely necessary in order to improve harmonisationthe asylum systems across all EU Member States;
Amendment 544 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Observes that the operation of the Dublin III Regulation10 has raised many questions linked to fairness and solidarity in the allocation of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection; notes that the current system does not take into sufficient consideration the particular migratory pressure faced by Member States situated at the Union’s external borders; believes that the European Union needs to accept the on-going difficulties with the Dublin logic, and to develop options for solidarity both among its Member States and the migrants concernedis under revision in order to increase its effectiveness and practicality during crisis situation; stresses however, that the basic principles of Dublin should not be changed regarding that an asylum seekers should be processed in the first Member State entered; stresses that this is essential in order to ensure proper processing, fingerprinting, the prevention of forum shopping and any possible pull factors; __________________ 10 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).
Amendment 552 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Points out that the pressure placed on the system – as established by the Dublin Regulation – by the rising number of migrants arriving in the Union has shown that, as implemented,some frontline E.U. Member States failed to take responsibility in putting the system – as established by the Dublin Regulation – in practice, and therefore theis system has largely failed to achieve its two primary goals of establishing objective and fair criteria for allocation of responsibility and of providing swift access to international protection;
Amendment 557 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Further points out that, at the same time, the incidence of secondary movements across the Union remains high; views it as self-evident that, since its creation, the Dublin system was not designed to share responsibility among Member States, but that its main purpose was to assign swiftly responsibility for processing an asylum application to a single Member State;
Amendment 568 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Recommends that the criteria on which the Relocation Decisions are based should be built directly into the Union’s standard rules for allocating responsibility; emphasises that, in reviewing the Dublin Regulation, it is important to reflect on the value of describing certain asylum seekers as ‘applicants in clear need of international protection’, since those migrants and refugees who do not fall into that category would still – at least under the current system – have to be dealt with by the Member State of first arrivalRelocation Decisions and the Dublin Regulation are two separate instruments which should be undertaken at two separate stages; this is essential if both the Dublin Regulation and Relocation are to work effectively and expediently;
Amendment 582 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Takes the view that the European Union should support thfrontline Member States receiving the most asylum claims with proportionate and adequate financial and technical support; considers that the rationale of using solidarity and responsibility-sharing measures is to enhwith financial and technical support; and that Member States should ensure meaningful and sufficient assets, expertise, and finances the quality and functioning of the CEASo Agencies supporting frontline Member States; such as EASO and FRONTEX, especially in light of FRONTEX's proposed increased mandate;
Amendment 585 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Takes the view that frontline Member States in peril having been offered such support, and refusing it to the disadvantage of other Member States, should be sanctioned;
Amendment 591 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 615 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 630 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Believes that the asylum systems of some frontline Member States are already clearly overburdened and that the Temporary Protection Directive should – under its own logic – have been triggered; calls, in any case, for a clear definition of ‘mass influx’ to be established upon revision of this directive; understands that such a revision of the Temporary Protection Directive can form part of the review of the Dublin system;
Amendment 658 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 b (new)
Paragraph 40 b (new)
40 b. Calls on the Commission to review the Qualifications Directive in line with the Convention of Geneva of 1951, so that EU Member States can establish and conduct effective national activation and integration policies, taking into account inter alia the 'unemployment trap' caused by having to provide refugees with a minimum subsistence allowance;
Amendment 672 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 685 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Reaffirms that better recognition of foreign qualifications is one practical way of ensuring that those third-country nationals already present in the Union can integrate better, and; calls on the Commission to come forward with appropriate proposals in that regardwhich assess the skills of refugees and third country nationals, and how this can address skills shortages of the individual Member States;
Amendment 690 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43 a. Underlines that such an individual examination of the application can be achieved by applying articles 33 in juncto 35 of the Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU;
Amendment 704 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Encourages the Member States to seek to keep familiimmediate family relatives together, which will assist integration prospects in the long-term as the focus can be directed towards the establishment of a new life instead of concerns towards family members that are still in insecure situations;
Amendment 739 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Understands that the safeStresses that at present the rate of return of s for those people who, following an individual assessment of their asylum application, are determined not to be eligible for protection in the Union is something that must be carried out as part of the proper implementation of the CEASrsons who do not qualify for asylum or refuge in the EU is far too low; thus overburdening the system and preventing genuine asylum seekers from receiving assistance and causing shortages in services and reception facilities in Member States; stresses that the safe return of individuals is part of EU law, as much as any other legal instrument which forms part of the EU acquis; calls for any practical obstacles in place to be removed, in order to better assist returns;
Amendment 784 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Suggests that any attempt by Member States to ‘push back’ migrants who have not been given the opportunity to present asylum claims runs contrary toNotes that Member States who return migrants from the EU's external border should do so in compliance with Union and international law, and that the Commission should take appropriate action against any Member State that attempts such ‘push backs’international agreements, which entails inter alia the possibility of push backs to safe harbours where asylum applications can be treated;
Amendment 801 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Acknowledges the recent Commission proposal for a Union list of safe countries of origin, amending the Asylum Procedures Directive13 ; observes that if such a Union list would become obligatory for Member States it could, in principle, be an important tool for facilitatinghaving a common approach to returns and speeding up the asylum process, including return; __________________ 13 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).
Amendment 814 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Regrets the current situation in which Member States apply different lists, containing different safe countries, hampering uniform application and incentivising secondary movemenWelcomes a uniform approach to safe third countries; but stresses that in addition to an EU list, Member States must also be able to keep national lists;
Amendment 851 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58 a. Stresses that EASO and FRONTEX should be able to independently assist in Member States failing to fulfil their legal obligations to ensure a functioning asylum system and external border control, under the instruction and monitoring of the Council and the European Commission, and that failure by the Member State involved to accept such assistance should lead to sanctions;
Amendment 854 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Observes that the EASO budget for 2015 for relocation, resettlement and the external dimension was a mere EUR 30 000; reiterates that this very small budget cannot be taken seriously in the light of current events in the Mediterranean and in the light of the multiple references made to EASO in the Relocation Decisions; recalls that significant increases in the budget of EASO, in its human resources and in the amounts it allocates in respect of relocation and resettlement, will be needed in the short, medium and long term; calls upon Member States to increase their contribution of resources and expertise;
Amendment 876 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)
Paragraph 61 a (new)
61 a. Stresses that, in order to avoid free- riding, invoking the EU. Coast and Border Guard, in case EU Member States fall short in protecting the EU's common borders, should be disincentivised by invoking legal or financial sanctions;
Amendment 877 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 b (new)
Paragraph 61 b (new)
61 b. Believes that, in line with the Geneva Convention 1951 and the principle of non-refoulement, the EU Coast and Border Guard's Return Office should focus on returning all intercepted asylum seekers that found de facto or legal protection outside the EU back to these safe havens, effectively applying the first country of asylum principle as inscribed in EU secondary law;
Amendment 880 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Looks forward to negotiations on the proposal within and between the co- legislators in the context of the ordinary legislative procedure, in accordance with Article 294 TFEU; and calls for any European Border Guard to be sufficiently equipped with resources and a mandate which can effectively manage the deficiencies of guarding the external border at a Member State level;
Amendment 944 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72 a (new)
Paragraph 72 a (new)
72 a. Regrets that the hotspots, called an essential part of the relocation mechanism by the European Commission, are still not fully operational, demonstrating the reluctance by both the European Commission and some front-line EU Member States to tackle secondary movements across the Schengen Area;
Amendment 987 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Underlines that another crucial step in dismantling criminal smuggling and trafficking networks is to prioritise financial investigations, as tracking and confiscating the profits of those criminal networks is essential if they are to be weakened and eventually dismantled; calls, in this regard, for the Member States to transpose swiftly and effectively the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive; and calls upon the European Commission to come forward with robust proposals in order to prevent, detect, and interrupt the flow of illicit money;
Amendment 1006 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Acknowledges that the basic instrument that sets out the objectives of the Union’s external policies on migration, asylum and borders is the GAMM; takes note that various instruments exist under that umbrella, including regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, mobility partnerships, common agendas for migration and mobility, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements, visa exemption agreements, RPPs and RDPPs; notes that the EU must be more ambitious in securing and implementing returns and readmission agreements, and leveraging its resources, such as expenditures under the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), in order to have third countries cooperating in taking back their own nationals who do not qualify for asylum in the EU;
Amendment 1046 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Stresses that the EU needs to encourage wealthy countries in conflict regions; and third countries across the globe, to offer resettlement and assist in providing aid and resources to those countries offering refugee in conflict regions; in order to discourage human trafficking; and prevent further loss of life through onward movement;
Amendment 1047 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86b. Stresses that the EU needs to act on supporting third countries offering refuge in conflict regions; both in terms of expertise and resources in order to ensure that there is not a "lost generation" of young people with no education or training;
Amendment 1083 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Highlights that the recent increase in arrivals of refugees and economic migrants into the Union has shown that, on their own, preventive measures are not sufficient for managing the current migration phenomena;
Amendment 1095 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Understands that, in the long term, greater impetus is needed in solving the geo-political issues that affect the root causes of migration, as war, poverty, corruption, hunger and a lack of opportunities means that people will still feel forced to flee to Europe unless Europe looks at how to help re-build those countries; points out that this means that the Commission and the Member States must put up the money to help build capacity in third countries, such as by facilitating investment and education, strengthening and enforcing asylum systems, helping to manage borders better, and reinforcing legal and judicial systems there; stresses that such investment is important in order to prevent "brain drain" from these countries; and to ensure that there is a young, educated, and ambitious workforce and society in the future;
Amendment 1131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 a (new)
Paragraph 97 a (new)
97a. Stresses that there should be a full and on-going assessment as to the effectiveness of EU funding and aid given to the third countries; and that the Commission should fully assess the impact of the money given in terms of stabilising the migrant crisis; stresses that there must be a clear and objective benefit for the EU and for asylum seekers;
Amendment 1142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101 a (new)
Paragraph 101 a (new)
101a. Notes that outside of the formal budget structures of the EU; Member States should look to support each other through the donation of assets and expertise;
Amendment 1155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 104
Paragraph 104
Amendment 1162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
Paragraph 105
Amendment 1167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
Amendment 1183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
Amendment 1191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
Amendment 1201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 a (new)
Paragraph 111 a (new)
111a. Takes the view that legal and economic migration and the EU jobs market should be dealt with entirely separately from the instruments intended to deal with asylum seekers and refuges; stresses that in order to have a quick and well-functioning system for both these areas it should be a two layered approach; points out that economic migrants and asylum seekers are two very different categories, which required individual and nuanced responses;
Amendment 1228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Reiterates that special procedures to ensure facilitation of complaints foreseen by Directive 2009/52/EC providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals (the ‘Employers’ Sanctions Directive’) should be fully implemented and correctly applied in practice; believes that increased protection for those victims of trafficking, and for those smuggled into the Union, who cooperate and facilitate prosecution of traffickers and/or criminal smugglers, is necessary; suggests that, in addition, support should be given for the setting up of a European Business Coalition against Trafficking in Human Beings (as mooted in the 2014 Strategy against Trafficking in Human Beings) with the purpose of developing supply chains that do not involve trafficking in human beings;
Amendment 1233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120
Paragraph 120
Amendment 1236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120 a (new)
Paragraph 120 a (new)
120a. Stresses the importance of being respectful of Member States' competences;
Amendment 1238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121
Paragraph 121
121. Believes, moreover, that it is clear that the directive should focus not just on the highly-qualified, but also on targeted high- qualification occupations where there are proven labour shortages; believes, in addition, that the revision of the Blue Card should be both ambitious and targeted, and should seek to remove the inconsistencies of the existing directive, particularly as regards parallel national schemes; recommends that thought be given to revising the scope to include those third-country nationals who could help tackle the gaps identified in EU labour markets;