BETA

19 Amendments of Daniel DALTON related to 2016/0133(COD)

Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the voluntary corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The European Union Agency for Asylum should also develop information material, in close cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.deleted
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure full respect for the principle of family unity and for the best interests of the child, the existence of a relationship of dependency between an applicant and his or her child, sibling or parent on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should become a binding responsibility criterion. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the presence of a family member or relative on the territory of another Member State who can take care of him or her should also become a binding responsibility criterion. In order to discourage secondary movements of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, and in the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this would not be in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure that that Member State will take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure the adequate protection of the child, and in particular the prompt appointment of a representative or representatives tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should be exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should only be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation. A Member State may, at its own discretion, derogate from the responsibility criteria if they wish to accept a request from an applicant after another Member State has been determined responsible for the applicant but before the application has been examined. This requires the agreement of both the Member State responsible for the application and the Member State that would assume the responsibility for the application. This transfer of responsibility can happen once only, at the request of an applicant and the agreement of both Member States involved. In cases where the applicant's request is unsuccessful, responsibility remains with the Member State originally determined responsible and the applicant is not able to make another request to any other Member State to take responsibility for their application.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A voluntary corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) When the allocation mechanism applies, the applicants who lodged their applications in the benefitting Member State should be allocated to Member States which are below their sharepledged number of applications on the basis of, based on the guidelines established by the reference key as applied to those Member States. Appropriate rules should be provided for in cases where an applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to national security or public order, especially rules as regards the exchange of information between competent asylum authorities of Member States. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should determine the Member State responsible, and should become responsible for examining the application, unless the overriding responsible criteria, related in particular to the presence of family members, determine that a different Member State should be responsible.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) A Member State of allocation may decide not to accept the allocated applicants during a twelve months-period, in which case it should enter this information in the automated system and notify the other Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. Thereafter the applicants that would have been allocated to that Member State should be allocated to the other Member States instead. The Member State which temporarily does not take part in the corrective allocation should make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per applicant not accepted to the Member State that was determined as responsible for examining those applications. The Commission should lay down the practical modalities for the implementation of the solidarity contribution mechanism in an implementing act. The European Union Agency for Asylum will monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.deleted
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States in the country of origin, the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5
- the sibling or siblings of the applicant;deleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 484 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Interviews with minors shall be conducted in a child-friendly manner. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. In the absence of a family member or a relative as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Member State responsible shall be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 609 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation. By way of Derogation from Article 3(1) a Member State may, with the agreement of the Member States already determined responsible, examine the application for international protection lodged by a third- country national or stateless person based on a formal request, in writing, from the applicant.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 618 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. It is at the discretion of the Member State to which the applicant was allocated and the Member State to which the applicant wishes to be allocated, to consider a request from an applicant and to apply paragraph 1.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 784 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The voluntary allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 802 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. The reference number of a Member State shall beMember States participating in the voluntary allocation mechanism shall pledge a number of places for allocation with reference to, but not determined by, the reference number that is determined by applying the key referred to in Article 35 to the total number of applications as well as the total number of resettled persons that have been entered by the respective Member States responsible in the automated system during the preceding 12 months.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 819 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of the corrective mechanism, thea non-binding reference number for each Member State shall be determined by a key.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 844 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The reference number for a Member State shall take into account the number of persons already granted international protection in the Member State and the resources and expertise pledged and delivered by the Member State.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 877 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
1. A Member State may, at the end of the three-month period after the entry into force of this Regulation and at the end of each twelve-month period thereafter, enter in the automated system that it will temporarily not take part in the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation as a Member State of allocation and notify this to the Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. 2. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall in that case apply the reference key during this twelve-month period to those Member States with a number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1), with the exception of the Member State which entered the information, as well as the benefitting Member State. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count each application which would have otherwise been allocated to the Member State which entered the information pursuant to Article 36(4) for the share of that Member State. 3. At the end of the twelve-month period referred to in paragraph 2, the automated system shall communicate to the Member State not taking part in the corrective allocation mechanism the number of applicants for whom it would have otherwise been the Member State of allocation. That Member State shall thereafter make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per each applicant who would have otherwise been allocated to that Member State during the respective twelve-month period. The solidarity contribution shall be paid to the Member State determined as responsible for examining the respective applications. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt a decision in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56, lay down the modalities for the implementation of paragraph 3. 5. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.Article 37 deleted Financial solidarity
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE