Activities of Emilian PAVEL related to 2017/2256(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Annual Report on the functioning of the Schengen area (debate) RO
Amendments (25)
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in recent years several factors have impacted the functioning of the Schengen area; whereas these factors include a sign, in particular Member States having reintroduced and subsequently prolonged controls at internal borders since2014; whereas the reintroduction of internal border controls has had a domino effect throughout the Schengen area, leaving some Member States with great difficant numbers of asylum seekers and irregular migrants with related secondary movementsulties; whereas the reintroduction of controls at internal borders seems related to a perception of the numbers of persons seeking international protection and irregular migrants arriving rather than the actual number of those arriving; whereas otheser factors also include terrorism and a heightened threat to public policy and the internal security of the Member States; whereas several Member States have also reintroduced and subsequently prolonged controls at internal borders since 2014;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, from March 2016, the Commission has proposed a series of measures with a view to restoring the normal functioning of the Schengen area; whereas the proper functioning of the Schengen area is not restored yet and depends on the adoption of such measures and on their implementation, in particular by Member States;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Schengen area is at a crossroads and requires decisive and joint actions to bring back the benefits it provides to the citizens; whereas it also requires mutual trust, cooperation and solidarity amongst Member states; whereas there should be no political discourse aiming at blaming Schengen;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 a (new)
Subheading 1 a (new)
-3. Points out that the EU legislator has adopted a number of measures in the last three years which were designed to reinforce the integrity of the Schengen Area without internal border control. Notes that these measures include a Regulation to establish a revamped European Border and Coast Guard Agency, a revision of the Schengen Borders Code to provide for mandatory systematic checks on EU nationals crossing external Schengen Borders, and a new Entry-Exit system to record the entry and exit of all third-country nationals entering the Schengen area for a short stay;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 b (new)
Subheading 1 b (new)
-2. Emphasises that the implementation of mandatory systematic checks on EU nationals crossing external Schengen Borders proved extremely difficult and resulted in disproportionate delays for the crossing of those external borders;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 c (new)
Subheading 1 c (new)
-1. Notes with dismay that despite the number of measures adopted and currently on the table, internal border controls persist within the Schengen Area without internal border control in flagrant breach of the existing rules of the Schengen Borders Code; Suggests that mutual trust is not strengthened when Member States choose to ignore the rules which they, themselves, have agreed upon;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 d (new)
Subheading 1 d (new)
0. Highlights that reintroducing border control at internal borders has proven much easier than removing those internal border controls once they have been reintroduced;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the effectiveness of the measures taken at the external borders and the creationorts of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency; notes the efforts of the Agency (‘EBCGA’) in implementing the new regulation, especially through joint operations in the field of border surveillance and return, and by supporting the Member States particularly affected by migratory pressuresubject to increased levels of migration; sees the importance of the newly introduced vulnerability assessment mechanism in uncovering weaknesses at the common external borders and preventing crises; emphasiszes the concerted efforts and cooperation between agencies and othMember sStakeholdertes in organising the ‘Hotspot’ approach; reiterates that the success or otherwise of such an approach has not yet been established;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers cooperation with third countries, in particular in the context of development policy and readmission agreements, as one of the most essential elements in finding the solution to irregular migration; as one element in reducing levels of irregular migration to the European Union; acknowledges that the basic instrument that sets out the objectives of the Union’s external policies on migration, asylum and borders is the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility; 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, Regional Protection Programmes and Regional Development and Protection Programmes;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to elaborate thea clear European Integrated Border Management (IBM) concept on the basis ofstrategy at political level, before requiring Member States to develop their national IBM strategies, in line with the provisions in the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the current state of Schengen and the issues it has enpersistence of internal border counteredrols are not due, primarily, to problems in the structure and construction ofrules of the Schengen area itself but rather to the connecrelated fields of the acquis, such as shortcomings in the area of the Common European Asylum System, including the Dublin Regulation, and the control of the external borders; underlines, all the same, that the rules applied under the Schengen Acquis could always be optimised and made clearer to avoid legal uncertainty regarding measures introduced unilaterally by Member States;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Condemns the continued reintroduction of internal border checks as this undermines the basic principles of the Schengen area, and expresses doubts about the lawfulness; takes the view that many of somthe prolongations of controlsare not in line with the existing rules and are therefore unlawful; is also of the opinion that Member States have not taken the proper measures to ensure cooperation with other affected Member States to minimise the effects of these measures, nor have they provided enough information on the results of such controls, therefore hindering the analysis by the Commission and scrutiny by Parliament; considers the economic, political and social impacts of this practice to be detrimental to the unity of the Schengen area and harmful to the prosperity of European citizens; recalls that Member States have other tools available, namely targeted police controls, as recommended by the Commission; iterates that the Union legislator has adopted many measures in the last three years to strengthen the external borders and external border control; underlines that there has been no corresponding reaction in terms of the removal of internal border controls; recalls that Member States have other tools available to them other that internal border control, including - as recommended by the Commission - targeted police controls provided that such controls do not have border control as an objective, are based on general police information or experience regarding possible threats to public security and aim, in particular, to combat cross-border crime, are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Appreciatcknowledges, as part of efforts to restore the normal functioning of Schengen, the proposal to amend the Schengen Borders Code; recalls that these changes should merely reflect the new challenges and diffuse threats to internal security and as regards the rules applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders; emphasises the need to establish clear rules that provide adequate reassurance for Member States without rendering internal border control easier to reintroduce and without encouraging the reintroduction of internal border control for longer than is absolutely necessary; recalls that any changes should not be a further avenue for prolonging internal border controls; considers that these steps are to be made carefully in order not to inflict irreversible damage on the basic idea of free movement;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses concern about the lack of implementation in some areas of the regulation governing certain fields of border control, such as the systematic consultation of databases during border checks and the thorough checking of the required entry conditions; notes that clear non-compliance in establishing National Coordination Centres in accordance with the European Border Surveillance System Regulation (EUROSUR) is prevalent in many Member States; Emphasises again that, in order for legislation on internal and external borders to be effective, it is essential that measures agreed at Union level are implemented properly by the Member States;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that all the Member States, including those with no external land borders, should do their utmost to ensure a high level of control at their external borders by allocating sufficient resources through staffing and expertise, establishing the necessary command and control structures and formulating up-to-date risk analyses in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 for all tiers of command to facilitate effective operations;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that cooperation at national level between different law enforcement services, the military, border guards and customs is often inadequate, resulting in fragmented situational awareness and low effectiveness; recalls that no amount of well-meaning measures at Union level can make up for a lack of internal cooperation between the relevant authorities of the Member States;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that were the Schengen evaluation mechanism to be revised, any proposal should address the major delays from the on-site visit to the implementing decisions and action plans and should facilitate swift remedial action on the part of the Member States; takes the view that the value of unannounced checks in the context of the Schengen Evaluation Mechanism could be enhanced were such checks to be made truly unannounced (not providing 24- hours notice);
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Subheading 3 a (new)
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Member States to make available the necessary information and statistical data to facilitate the national management of resources and capabilities related to border control; calls on the Member States, in particular those directly affected, to prepare and sufficiently test necessary contingency plans to mitigate situations of disproportionate migratory pressureincreased levels of migration, as well as to increasenhance their registration and accommodation capacity in case of such events; calls on the Member States to improve their capabilities to detect document fraud and clandestineirregular entries;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Insists that multipurpose operations be conducted by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency with the aim of responding to the need for maritime search-and-rescue assets (as provided for in Regulation (EU) No 656/2014) to be present in the relevant areas; requiresnotes that the European Border and Coast Guard Agency to takehas been given a mandate for a more active role in supporting the Member States in coordinated return operations;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Recalls the high priority given to the reform of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) as part of the holistic approach to tackling the refugee and migratiohumanitarian crisis and of the Commission’s Agenda on Migration; calls on the Council to swiftly follow Parliament in adopting a mandate for negotiations on every proposal in this regard, particularly as regards the Dublin Regulation; highlights that the new European Agency for Asylum has still to be approved and urges the Council to unblock this file as a matter of urgency;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Insists on developing the Schengen evaluation mechanism together with the vulnerability assessment tool in a way that impreovents unforeseen relapses ins the overall management of the external borders, enhances the respect of the Schengen acquis and facilitates thorough scrutiny and transparency between Member States and institutions;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative proposal to amend the EUROSUR Regulation in light of the major shortfalls encountered in the implementation of the current regulation, and considers that such a proposal should encourage greater use of EUROSUR to engage and assist search and rescue operations;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses the importance of reforming and adapting the SIS to face new challenges swiftly, namely regarding the protection of missing children, the immediate exchange of information on terrorism and the mandatory exchange of information on return decisions; highlights the anticipatedemphasises that such reform must not undermine the principles of necessity and proportionality; underlines that if the system is to function properly alerts must require action and should justify their inclusion in the system; points out that mutual trust in the system is not improved through the continued expansion of both the number of alerts and the amount of data stored in each alert; highlights, nevertheless, that the reforms should lead to a substantial increase in the activity of the Supplementary Information Request at the National Entry (SIRENE) Bureau and calls on Member States to reinforce the means at its disposal by ensuring that it has adequate financial and human resources to carry out its new functions;