Mr President, Commissioner, last week I visited Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Serbska. Ladies and gentlemen, it is only ten years since the atrocious killing and massacring of innocent people was begun in the middle of a Europe which we had all promised would never again see mass graves containing desecrated corpses. That was not to be the case. Mass graves are being found today and the remains of corpses identified. I myself saw the remains of 500 people laid out in a line in industrial premises. Mr President, never before have the EU’s shortcomings been more evident. When the refugees began streaming in, the EU acted slowly and was completely powerless to act. What was lacking was a common approach. Mr Marinho’s report, like the Commission’s proposal, is therefore extremely important. I want to praise the rapporteur for the work he has put in and for the sensitivity he has shown. We in the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party accept the basic principle contained in the proposal, relating to the way in which asylum seekers are to be regarded, how the issue is to be dealt with and what exceptions there are. However, we wish to make the rules more predictable and to increase the consideration given to the wishes of the individual. A number of the proposals were also very properly accepted by the committee. Allow me to mention a number of important points. Increased account must be taken of individual wishes concerning the country of asylum. These are people we are dealing with! The rules determining which country is responsible must be characterised by the rule of law and by predictability. In the case of an asylum seeker who is still a minor, a person other than a relative and who has close links with the minor must be able to obtain custody of the child if it is in the latter’s interests. The country of asylum responsible can therefore be decided in terms of such factors. It must be possible for asylum seekers who have family members in a particular Member State to have their applications examined in that country. Appeals concerning which country is responsible for examining the application must have a delaying effect so that asylum seekers are not moved to another Member State during the waiting period. It must only be possible to release personal data concerning asylum seekers to the Member States concerned and not to all the Member States, as proposed by the Commission. Allow me to highlight especially Amendment No 12, which Mrs Klamt also touched upon. It is our view that partners and cohabitees, irrespective of gender, should be counted as family members in Member States which treat unmarried and married couples equally. The Commission is unclear about this point, and clarification is needed in this area. It is my hope that the House will be able to support this proposal tomorrow. In conclusion, I want to put a direct question to Commissioner Vitorino. In my view, the type of abuses that go on at Sangatte near the Channel Tunnel, with people shunted about and responsibility divided between different Member States, should be rendered impossible by the proposal you have produced. What are you doing to ensure right now that there can be no repetition of the events at Sangatte? What are you doing, in conjunction with London and Paris, to ensure that this proposal can become a reality straight away?

Political group: ELDR