10 Amendments of Nadine MORANO related to 2019/2206(INI)
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas at EU level, most asylum applications are unjustified and are rejected following a final court decision1 a taken in application of the rule of law; _________________ 1aEUROSTAT: 'Decisions on asylum applications in the EU in 2019', 27 April 2020
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Dublin system places a significant burden on a minority of Member States, in particular when influxes of migrants occur; takes the view that the EU therefore needs a solidarity mechanism which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of objective criteria of asylum seekers who are manifestly eligible for asylumensures that the resources and capabilities of front-line Member States are strengthened;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the crisis management tool provided for in Article 33 did not provide effective support to the Member States, nor did it offer a response to the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis; considers that a solidarity-based crisis management mechanism, endowed with a financial instrument managed by the Commission, should be established to ensure continuity of the right of asylumasylum management in the EU under the best possible conditions;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to make use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional circumstances so warrant, for example to relocate asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decent reception conditions;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the introduction, in accordance with international law, of fast- track Dublin procedures at the main points of irregular arrival in the EU, in European reception centres, in order to process asylum applications swiftly, assess their merits, determine the Member State responsible and, where appropriate, return asylum seekers without an unnecessarily prolonged detention period, making use of procedures for placing them in detention if necessary;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the protection of fundamental rights must be at the heart of the measures taken to implement the Dublin III Regulation, including the protection of children, victims of trafficking and the most vulnerable; stresses that the protection of fundamental rights must not result in an increase in the trafficking of children or vulnerable people;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the number of transfer procedures has increased significantly, generating considerable human, material and financial costs; deplores, however, the fact that in only 11% of cases are transfers actually carried out, a further factor in the permanent overloading of asylum systems; stresses the lack of cooperation and information-sharing between Member States and also on the part of third countries which are asylum seekers' countries of origin or through which they have transited; regards efforts to combat secondary movements as essential in order to reduce the number of transfer requests; proposes that the conditions which trigger transfer procedures be clarified and harmonised;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that in some cases the rules on transfer of responsibility under Dublin III undermine the efficiency of asylum procedures and the carrying-out of transfers and contribute to the increase in the number of secondary movements by encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the system; calls on the Commission to revise the rules, in order to give Member States sufficient time to carry out transfers and do away with transfer of responsibility in cases where an asylum seeker absconds; also asks the Commission to plan a permanent mechanism for nullifying asylum applications submitted by applicants who fail to comply with their obligations or who submit multiple asylum applications;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the rate of protection for asylum seekers varies greatly between Member States for certain nationalities; considers that a common list of safe countries and a shared country-risk analysis, or at least greater convergence, would reduce these disparities, and thus also the number of secondary movements; stresses that the return of persons not eligible for asylum – who are in the majority at EU level – is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of the Dublin III Regulation;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the rate of protection for asylum seekers varies greatly between Member States for certain nationalities; considers that a common list of safe countries and regions and a shared country/region-risk analysis, or at least greater convergence, would reduce these disparities, and thus also the number of secondary movements; stresses that the return of persons not eligible for asylum is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of the Dublin III Regulation;