Activities of Dennis de JONG related to 2015/2095(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
The situation in the Mediterranean and the need for a holistic EU approach to migration (A8-0066/2016 - Roberta Metsola, Kashetu Kyenge) NL
Amendments (24)
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)
Citation 1 d (new)
- having regard to the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989,
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H c (new)
Recital H c (new)
H c. whereas, according to Europol, at least 10,000 unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) seeking asylum have disappeared after arriving in Europe and are feared to have fallen into the hands of organised trafficking and criminal organisations.
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H d (new)
Recital H d (new)
H d. whereas guardians are a key element of a protection system for children who are temporarily or permanently deprived of their family environment and cannot have their interests represented by their parents; whereas there are great disparities between the types of guardianship provided to children in and within EU Member States.
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
P a. whereas no forced returns to countries of origin or third-countries may take place if such returns may violate article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Condemns seizing of valuables from asylum seekers in order to finance the cost of their stay during the asylum procedures in a Member State which constitutes an infringement of the human dignity of the persons concerned and violates the right to property enshrined in Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the ECHR.
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the saving of lives is an act of solidarity with those at risk, but that it is also a legal obligation under international law, as Article 98 of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea – ratified by all Member States and the Union itself – requires assistance to be given to any person in distress at sea; calls on Member States to align their national legislation accordingly;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Holds that any holistic approach to migration must necessarily contain measures aimed at disrupting the activities of criminal networks involved in the trafficking and smuggling of people, without criminalizing or otherwise interfering with humanitarian assistance offered by NGO's or individual persons;
Amendment 386 #
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, as well as for the complicated applications on which a decision can't be taken immediately; 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;
Amendment 393 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes, in addition, that Member States of first arrivalto where relocation has taken place will therefore have to handle the more complicated asylum claims (and appeals), will have to organise longer periods of reception, and will have to organise and coordinate returns for those ultimately not entitled to international protection;
Amendment 564 #
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 arrival;
Amendment 596 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Points out that one option for a fundamental overhaul of the Dublin system would be to establish a central collection of applications at Union level – viewing each asylum seeker as someone seeking asylum in the Union as a whole and not in an individual Member State – and tosystem of European asylum centres in the EU, near its external borders, or in case of specific bottlenecks also at internal borders of a Member State, where a first examination of the asylum application takes place, viewing each asylum seeker as someone seeking asylum in the Union as a whole and not in an individual Member State; takes the view that in these centres priority should be given to applications of persons who are clearly in need of international protection and to ensure their protection; moreover, suggests to distribute more complicated applications among Member States by establishing a central system for the allocation of responsibility for any persons seeking asylum in the Unthese applications; suggests that such a system could provide for certain relative thresholds per Member State, above which no further allocation of responsibility could be made until all other Member States have met their own thresholds, which could conceivably help in deterring secondary movements, as all Member States would be fully involved in the centralised system and no longer have individual responsibility for allocation of applicants to other Member States; believes that such a system could function on the basis of a number of Union ‘hotspots’ from where Union distribution should take place; underlines that any new system for allocation of responsibility must incorporate the key concepts of family unity and the best interests of the child; finally, takes the view that manifestly unfounded asylum applications should be dealt with in the European asylum centres, without further re-allocation of responsibility among Member States, in order to facilitate the return of applicants whose claim has been rejected;
Amendment 675 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Takes the view that, where those persons granted international protection in the Union have an offer of employment in a Member State other than the one in which they have been granted international protection, they should be able to avail themselves of such an offer after a transitory period of a maximum of five years;
Amendment 720 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 a (new)
Paragraph 47 a (new)
47 a. Points to the vulnerable position of unaccompanied minors who represent 9% of all asylum applicants and calls for special reception facilities, ensuring their safety and well-being upon arrival in the EU; regrets that the concept of 'hotspots' does not foresee any such special facilities yet and urges the Commission to earmark the necessary funding for this purpose;
Amendment 721 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 b (new)
Paragraph 47 b (new)
47 b. Refers to the recent information of Europol indicating that so far at least 10.000 minors are missing and that they may have become victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation; calls for urgent measures to protect minors during their stay and travel in the Member States, both by offering special assistance to minors and their families and by fighting the criminal networks targeting minors as a matter of the highest priority;
Amendment 826 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Underlines, in any event, that any list of safe countries of origin should not detract from the principle that every person must be allowed an appropriate individual examination of his or her application for international protection and should, in particular, have ample opportunity to raise personal circumstances why the country of origin concerned cannot be considered safe in his or her case;
Amendment 959 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74
Paragraph 74
74. Recognises that one of the main purposes of hotspots is to allow the Union to grant protection and humanitarian assistance in a swift manner to those in need; emphasises that great care needs to be taken to ensure that the categorising of migrants at hotspots is carried out in full respect for the rights of all migrants, including the provision to appeal in line with the EU Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU; acknowledges, however, that proper identification of applicants for international protection at the point of first arrival in the Union should help facilitate the overall functioning of any reformed CEAS;
Amendment 968 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74 a (new)
Paragraph 74 a (new)
74a. Underlines that the Member States should allow access for NGO's, lawyers and other relevant interest groups to the hotspots;
Amendment 1025 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. Calls on the Union to help third countries build up their asylum systems and integration strategies in order to allow third country nationals in need of international protection to seek protection there; believes that the Union must adopt a win-win approach to cooperation with third countries, that is, an approach that is beneficial to the Union, to the third country in question and to the refugees and migrants in that third country; calls, in this respect, for close co-operation with UNHCR;
Amendment 1092 #
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, demographic imbalances and a consequent 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;
Amendment 1193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Takes the view that, in the long run, the Union will need to establish more general rules governing the entry and residence for those third-country nationals seeking employment in the Union to, whilst fiull the gaps identified in the Union labour markety recognizing that Member States retain the right to decide about admission for employment, as they are best suited to examine whether the need for legal migration is structural, or can also be met by investing in relevant training and educational programmes for the unemployed;
Amendment 1207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112
Paragraph 112
112. Calls for a comprehensive vision of the labour market in the UnionMember States as a necessary pre-condition for the development of labour market policies; points out that it is necessary to develop tools for identifying and forecasting present and future labour market needs in the UnionMember States in a better way; suggests, in that regard, that existing tools – such as those developed by the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) or the OECD – could be improved upon, and even merged, with international statistics on potential labour supply from third countries in order to provide a more accurate picture of the situation;
Amendment 1210 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 113
Paragraph 113
113. Believes that better data and improved tools for analysing such data can only help policy-makers determine future labour migration policies, and that the Union and the Member States should identify gaps in their labour markets that could help them fill jobs that would otherwise remain vacant;
Amendment 1231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 119
Paragraph 119
119. RecallNotes that in the Agenda on Migration, the Commission announced its intention to revise the Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third- country nationals for the purposes of highly qualified employment (the ‘Blue Card Directive’), looking particularly at the issues of scope (possibly covering entrepreneurs willing to invest in Europe) and improving the rules on intra-EU mobility;
Amendment 1234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120
Paragraph 120
120. ReiteraNotes that the Commission’s Implementation Report on the current Blue Card Directive underlines its flaws, including the very limited level of harmonisation brought about by the wide discretion in implementation it gives the Member States, in particular the right for Member States to maintain parallel national schemes;