16 Amendments of Marian-Jean MARINESCU related to 2008/2181(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Union and its Member States face enormous pressure from illegal immigration, as people from third countries seek to come here, often at risk to their lives and by relying on human smugglers,
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the threat posed by international terrorism and cross-border crime requires the strengthening of the border security by ensuring the coordination of Member States' action regarding the management of the external borders,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas cooperation with third countries' border security authorities is a priority within general EU external policy and is targeted at sustainable partnership,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas the EU external border is crossed every year by 160 million EU citizens, 60 million third country nationals not requiring a visa, and 80 million requiring a visa,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas measures to enhance border security must go hand in hand with facilitation of passenger flows and promoting mobility in an increasingly globalised world,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the operability and reliability of existing instruments such as SIS II are being called into question and their assessment will decide whether the system will be abandoned or not,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Acknowledges that a part of the data necessary to create an Entry/Exit system is already collected by the existing systems such as VIS, SIS, EURODAC. Therefore the further approach of the Commission should be based on the interconnection of the current systems and the extension of their functionalities, which would ensure collection and processing of additional data. Considers that, by using an integrated system, the cost-efficiency would be increased and the activity on the cross-border points would be more efficient;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Asks the Commission to specify the further implications of detecting the 'over- stayers', notably regarding the competent authorities to whom this data will be sent or who will have access to such data and under what conditions;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5. Suggests that the Automated Border Control System should be connected to the existing alert systems;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Criticises, however, the terminology used in the Communication entitled 'Preparing the next steps in border management in the European Union' ('low- risk'/'bona fide' travellers), as it would imply that a huge number of travellers are considered a priori as 'high-risk' or 'mala fide', and recommends the term "frequent travellers";
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Acknowledges that it would be unwise to focus attention in terms of security measures only on TCNs travelling to the EU from countries with a visa requirement; questions, however, whether the proposed system is absolutely necessary and would like a thorough explanation of the rationale for it; is convinced that close cooperation between intelligence serviclaw enforcement agencies in particular is the right way forward, rather than a massive collection of data in general;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Considers that the creation of ESTA is not financially justified and suggests replacing this proposed system with the obligativity for the TCNs not requiring a visa, to use a biometric passport when entering EU;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is, however, of the opinion that, within the framework of border and immigration management, far reaching proposals are piling up at an amazing pace; asks therefore the Commission to think in terms of necessity and cost of the border logistics;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Criticises the lack of a comprehensive master plan setting out the overall objectives and architecture of the EU's border management strategy as well as the details for how all related programmes and schemes (already in place, in the course of preparation or at the stage of policy development) are supposed to function together and how relationships among them can be optimised; when considering the architecture of the EU’s border management strategy, the Commission should first of all analyse the effectiveness of the existing border management systems of the Member States, in order to obtain the optimal synergies among them. As a first step, a pilot project should be launched to assess thoroughly the systems in place, and in the second stage to make use of the results of this assessment for further needed improvement;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Furthermore, the Commission should be aware that securing the external EU border should be complemented by programmes for strengthening the third country borders neighbouring the EU, included in the actual framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy (the Eastern Partnership, EUROMED) and countries that are part of the Stabilisation and Association Process for South East Europe;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the need for an evaluation and assessment of existing systems and those under preparation first of all, and emphasizes that the EU's ability to achieve its strategic goals depends to a great extent on its success in managing the interdependencies among related programmes, as duplication and inconsistency across them will have a negative impact on organisational performance and results as a consequence; is the opinion that no new instruments and systems should be launched until the existing tools are fully operational, safe and reliable;