Statements by the President
Last week, in the Turkish town of Malatya, three people working for Zirve, a Christian publishing house, were murdered in a particularly cruel manner. This was a dreadful deed, one that I condemn in the strongest terms, and I would encourage the Turkish authorities to continue in their efforts to shed light on every aspect of this crime. The Turkish Government has strongly denounced these attacks, and I would urge them most emphatically to bring those responsible to account for their actions. The protection of religious minorities and of their rights is an important function of the rule of law in any democratic state, and this House condemns all crimes committed by political or religious fanatics against those whose opinions and convictions differ from their own.
I have to inform the House that the news has just reached us of the death of Boris Yeltsin, the former - and first - President of Russia. We wish to express our sympathies to the Russian people.


Documents received: see Minutes


Membership of committees and delegations: see Minutes


Women in international politics (debate)
The next item is the report by Mrs Gomes, on behalf of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, on Women in international politics.
rapporteur. - (PT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to express my gratitude for all the contributions that I received from all political groups in drawing up this report. These contributions improved the report substantially. The presence of women in international political life has increased. Take, for example, Chancellor Merkel, President Bachelet and President Johnson-Sirleaf and Prime-Ministers Han Myeong-Sook of South Korea and Diogo of Mozambique. Indeed, the EU Presidency is currently headed by a woman, Mrs Halonen. Yet closer inspection reveals that the female presence in politics remains unsatisfactory, both at world and European level, including within each Member State. Gathering data for this report was not easy, and that tells its own bleak story.
At global level, in spite of the declaration and the platform for action adopted in Beijing, and in spite of the Millennium Development Goals, only ten out of the 191 Member States of the United Nations have a woman as Head of State or Government and only 16% of members of parliament around the world are women. In the UN, of the 91 envoys or representatives of the Secretary-General only nine are women.
In spite of Resolution 1325 of the Security Council, adopted six months ago, the composition of international bodies and missions involved in conflict prevention continues to be characterised by inequality. Three weeks ago, the Security Council held a debate on women, peace and security in order to gauge progress in the implementation of Resolution 1325. All agreed that there remains much to be done to translate good intentions and positive words into action. What emerged from the debate were recommendations to involve more women in peace missions and thereby to improve the operational effectiveness of these missions. There was also a call for an urgent change of culture in the office of the Deputy Secretary-General for peace-keeping operations. Our report contains similar recommendations.
I now turn to the situation in Europe. Despite Resolution 2025, and others from this Parliament, and despite, too, the Lisbon Strategy, the composition of the European Commission is not yet characterised by gender parity. Furthermore, out of 107 EU third-country delegations, only seven women are currently serving at the level of Head of EC delegation. In the Council, there is only one woman among the 14 personal representatives of the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. This despite the abundance of qualified, experienced and capable women in the Member States and in the European Institutions.
At practically all levels of decision-making apart from the top, there are signs that the glass ceiling is starting at least to bulge, if not to break, because it is indeed only at the very top echelons of European power that women remain scandalously under-represented. At national level, I wish to highlight the pioneering example of the Zapatero Government in Spain. In a world in which the political machinery has a history of blocking women's involvement in political and economic power, this is a model example, which demonstrates that democracy characterised by gender parity is possible and depends a great deal on clear political leadership.
The conclusions of this report are simple: action must be taken to redress inequality of opportunities at European and national level in all fields: for example, the UN and its Secretary-General, by means of a human resources policy that ought to act as an example to the world, and the EU, by means of support to international women's networks and human resources policies ensuring the balanced presence of men and women in positions of political and economic decision-making.
In this connection, I welcome the fact that the Council has just sent a questionnaire to the Member States to gauge the level of implementation of Resolution 1325. National governments must also encourage more women to apply for political positions at national, European and international level and must ensure that electoral systems produce democratic institutions with balanced representation; no democratic institutions should have fewer than 40% and more than 60% of either sex. Quotas and other mechanisms designed to redress the balance, currently necessary for women, may become necessary for men. Without parity of representation, democracy is incomplete and does not work properly. In this regard, laws and measures contributing towards a better home and working life balance have a vital role to play.
Lastly, political parties should promote women's involvement by setting quotas and establishing other mechanisms for redressing the balance, including specific training for women to embark on a career in politics. The impetus for change also depends on the quality of party political leadership. Take my country, Portugal, for example, where women have only been allowed to become, for example, judges, diplomats and armed and security forces professionals since the fall of the dictatorship in 1974. These are careers that could provide many more candidates of both sexes for all kinds of European and international missions and posts. Since 1974, there has been extraordinary progress in the presence of women in these careers, yet this progress does not extend to the top of these fields, for example in government or party political decision-making. It is abundantly clear that the glass ceiling effect is in operation, in spite of the overwhelming presence of qualified women in universities, public administration and the world of work as a whole. A parity law governing the electoral lists of the political parties has recently been adopted and practical results are expected. On the path we must follow, numbers should not be our prime concern. Rather, we must recognise and highlight the qualitative difference made by the political representation of women in defining government agendas, in conflict resolution, in transparency and in presentation of accounts; in other words, in reinforcing the rule of law and democracy.
Vice-President of the Commission. Madam President, I would like to start by congratulating the honourable rapporteur for this excellent report. The Commission works hard to promote gender equality both within and outside the European Union and in this regard the European Parliament's sustained commitment to these issues is vital.
The world needs women leaders at all levels, be it in local communities or in international politics. Women and men must participate on equal terms in the drafting of agendas that affect us all and in the development of solutions to the problems we are facing.
However, if we look around us, what do we see? Men still make most of the decisions. The main examples given in your report clearly demonstrate that the picture is not ideal even for our European democracies and, as you correctly point out, further efforts are needed even inside our respective institutions, the Commission and the Council, to achieve a better gender balance.
Stereotypes and discrimination persist, biased recruitment and promotion systems are rampant, labour market and educational segregation hinder women in achieving their full potential.
One of the core factors remains the imbalanced division of work and family responsibilities. While the competence to act in this field remains at national level, I am convinced that the Commission can bring real added value by promoting awareness-raising, information gathering, research and analysis, networking and dissemination of best practice. This role of the Commission is clearly reflected in our March 2006 Communication 'Roadmap to Gender Equality'. The future European Institute for Gender Equality will also help keep the issue high on the European agenda, collect and analyse data, conduct research and disseminate good practice.
One priority of the roadmap is promotion of the participation of women and men in decision-making processes. Considering that negative gender stereotypes are strongly related to the unequal representation of women, we have chosen their elimination as another key objective for our programme.
Amongst the Commission's strategic actions for the next five years, the establishment of a European network of women in economic and political decision-making can be highlighted, as well as awareness-raising campaigns, data collection, analysis and exchange of good practices involving all stakeholders to combat gender stereotypes.
The roadmap also includes the promotion of gender equality outside the European Union. As an example of our action in the external policy field, I would like to mention the Five-Year Action Plan on Gender Equality being signed today in Istanbul by Ministers from the 35 countries of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. Women's political participation is one of the key pillars of today's Action Plan that will be supported by a regional project starting in 2007.
Through the European Initiative on Democracy and Human Rights, we fund several projects promoted women's empowerment. As examples I would like to mention the regional project in West Africa aiming at enhancing women's participation in five countries of the region, the regional project in Latin America, seeking to enhance the democratic participation of young people, particularly girls, and the projects undertaken in Egypt, Jordan, Nigeria, Morocco and Kyrgyzstan to empower women to actively participate in political life.
It is useful that a reference to elections is included in the report. In that context, the Commission has already incorporated the gender perspective into the election observation methodology and women's participation is systematically monitored throughout the Election Observation Missions. A good example of this can be seen in the European mission recently deployed to Yemen.
As you know, the Commission has a strong and long-standing commitment to mainstream gender across the board in our external relations. Since 2001, the 'Programme of Action for Mainstreaming Gender Equality in Community Development Cooperation' has given us a framework within which we have implemented an extensive training programme and developed political tools. In 2007, in cooperation with the United Nations and the International Labour Organisation, we shall be launching a new capacity-building programme, this time directed principally at our partner governments, civil society and other programme-implementing partners in third countries. A specific thematic focus of this programme will be the promotion of women's participation in peace building, along the lines of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325.
Finally, it is clear to me that, although progress has been made, tremendous efforts are still needed to progress towards gender equality and women's effective participation in the political sphere. In that respect, the Commission is committed to continuing to mobilise all the instruments available. Pressing issues include the following: first, we need a stronger gender focus in electoral, constitutional, legal and judicial matters. We need to enhance our support of women's active involvement in defining and implementing policies at national level. Secondly, companies need more women at board level to ensure that the widest possible range of thinking, perspectives, experience and abilities is brought to bear on high-level decision-making. Third, overcoming gender stereotypes in education, training, the labour market and in the media remains an important challenge in all countries.
Finally, to achieve gender balance in decision-making, men must be mobilised and fully involved if we want to move ahead. Family-friendly policies for women and men, such as more flexible working arrangements and quality childcare facilities, can be of much help.
Madam President, the initiative by Mrs Gomes to draft a report on women in international politics is praiseworthy because, as the Commissioner also pertinently observed, comparisons of the numbers and figures she presents - from Nobel prizewinners to the number of women who have reached key positions in international politics in the Member States or in international organisations - illustrate the lack of female participation.
It is incontestable that a democratic society must be represented in a worthy manner by both men and women and that equal participation should start with training and early initiation into the secrets of politics for men and women, without gender discrimination, and with the possibility of linking professional employment in international foreign politics with family life.
Alongside the rich action and promising plans of the European Union, the Gomes report would retain its value and topical nature if it did not include references to specific national governments and if it did not present lists of countries which have taken measures which cannot be evaluated merely by being referred to.
The participation of women as a mere physical presence on the international political stage is not enough. On the contrary, it must be due to qualifications and abilities evaluated independently of their sex. The constitutions and laws of the Member States should support the principle of equal treatment and the parties should promote worthy men and women without discrimination. Is this not, however, a question of subsidiarity? Can we dictate the composition of the UN? We shall not therefore support these specific points of the report.
I do, of course, congratulate the European Commission on its efforts and the European Parliament should support the principle of equality and promote commensurate numbers during the composition of its directorates, delegations representations and delegations.
We shall only support the specific points of the report to which I referred.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (HU) Madam President, the balanced participation of women in decision-making is one of the main challenges of a policy of equal opportunity. This matter also figures on the upcoming action programme on equal opportunities. This effort must be brought to fruition in all spheres, including external policy, to name but one. For equal opportunity cannot be restricted to the territory of the European Union. We must promote the presence of women in political life around the world.
Our views remain voices in the wilderness if they are not accompanied by the necessary political will. For this reason, it is important that at the March Summit six prime ministers, namely those of the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Hungary and Sweden, approved the European Pact for Gender Equality, which extends the perspectives of equal opportunity to our collaboration with the Commission as well. This will, hopefully, provide further possibilities both for women's advancement in the workplace and in the creation of a suitable work-family balance. My fellow representative has done excellent work, and I propose that we approve the report.
(SK) I understand why, as a former diplomat and as a woman who has been involved in politics for years, Mrs Gomes has proposed this topic, and I congratulate her on it.
I fully support the idea that the equal and full participation of women in the political process and in decision-making should fully reflect the true make-up of society. Such participation is important for future generations and for the proper functioning of democratic systems. There is no doubt that equality between the sexes in terms of dignity and responsibility fully justifies the rise of women to public positions. Genuine support for women in politics requires a clear acknowledgement of their value as mothers and their role in the family and this applies in relation to all other public functions and professions.
In addition, these functions and professions must be closely interlinked if we want social and cultural development to be genuinely and fully humane. Let us be honest. Women are always deeply involved in life's difficult moments, where they make great peacemakers and mediators par excellence. We certainly need to do much more to ensure that the conditions under which women and mothers live and work do not result in any discrimination in the world of politics. In the future, women will be increasingly involved in the serious, hotly debated issues of the day. It is unusual to see a strong social presence of women in all areas, as women are naturally opposed to a society organised exclusively on the basis of efficiency and productivity, and they insist on redefining these systems in a more humane way.
In conclusion, I would like to express the wish that all women who are active in politics may become preachers of a new feminism, capable of appreciating and expressing the true talents of women in all areas of social life, without being tempted to imitate the models created by our male counterparts. And these are talents aimed at overcoming all forms of discrimination in public administration and in political parties.
(IT) Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, five days ago the United Nations celebrated the 60th anniversary of the creation of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. On that occasion Kofi Annan stated that the world is finally starting to grasp that there is no more effective tool for promoting development than the empowerment of women and girls, empowerment, says Annan, that raises economic productivity, reduces infant and maternal mortality, improves nutrition and promotes health.
The concept of empowerment, first developed by the European Union, was launched with great impetus by the Fourth United Nations Conference on Women, the Beijing Conference, eleven years ago. The time has come to revive the idea of empowerment by organising a new world conference. In this report we call on the United Nations once again to convene the Fifth World Conference, and we do so with one voice, the European voice, representing 25, soon to be 27, members of the United Nations out of a total of 191 members, a group carrying significant weight. This is one of the follow-up actions that we call for in voting for this thorough and balanced report, on which we congratulate the rapporteur.
(EL) Madam President, it is clear from the previous speeches that there is a lack of participation by women in the exercise of international politics, a record lack you might say, in comparison with other political sectors.
I therefore thank Mrs Gomes, who has given us the opportunity to debate this issue once again. Firstly, because it is a very important issue from the point of view of equilibrium and democracy in the modern world and is a particular dimension of the efforts to achieve equality, justice and, of course, prosperity, as we have already heard.
The second reason is because this dimension is not usually included in the strategies for equality applied by the Member States and the European Union does not, of course, have the competence to impose it, although it could promote it more bindingly and more effectively.
The current situation is not satisfactory, as we have heard, nor are the forecasts optimistic, given that, according to surveys, globally we could exceed a level of 30% in the participation of women in national parliaments alone after 2040. We therefore need to take a good look at ourselves and to apportion blame honestly, to recognise that simple truths and fundamental values are not being applied in practice as a result of the lack of awareness-raising of and information for society and, of course, the lack of political will in all the agencies, each for its part, as stated in the report and in the amendments tabled by my political group.
To close, I should like to comment on our responsibilities in the institutions of the European Union. Both the European Commission and the European Parliament should routinely include in their external relations the dimension of issues of concern to women and should seek balanced participation, both in their speakers in external relations and in the composition of their delegations.
(PT) I wish to begin by congratulating Mrs Gomes on her excellent report, which addresses a most topical and relevant subject. Women remain under-represented in both national and European political life, and this is no less true of the European Parliament.
It is incomprehensible that there should be more women than men in universities and increasing numbers of women with masters degrees and doctorates, and that at the same time it is rare to find women in positions of political decision-making or economic power. When they reach a certain level there is always a glass ceiling blocking their path.
Parity is a vital element of democracy itself. Experience has shown that a quota system has led to a more equal, and in turn, a fairer and more harmonious, society. The Member States must adopt laws that guarantee parity.
I should like to conclude, Madam President, with a rhetorical question. How different would the world be if it were governed by a female majority? Would Europe not be different, too?
(SV) Madam President, I should like to begin by thanking Mrs Gomes for a quite excellent report. This issue is extremely important from the perspectives of both gender equality and democracy. More than half of Europeans are women. The fact is, then, that it is also important from a democratic point of view for women to participate as fully as men in the political decision-making process.
European policy on equality is based on welfare - something that we must treasure and on which we need to build further, for there are now major deficits where both equality and welfare are concerned. It is a question of being able to combine private and professional life. We are concerned here with the unequal distribution of family responsibility and with discrimination in employment and professional education. We must help each other so that women too are enabled to participate in the political process. A country in which power is not divided equally between men and women is not a welfare state in which all are equal. In the long run, such a state is good for men too but, in the short term, men need perhaps to give way a little and allow women a little more room.
In spite of political statements, recommendations, action programmes and special legislation at national level, women are still under-represented in politics. What is needed if we are to have equality? I believe, unfortunately, that the only solution is to employ quotas and legislation, which should not be needed. If men were to take part in the work to promote gender equality, this major problem could be solved.
(ES) Madam President, we know that international conflicts affect women in particular: the majority of refugees and displaced persons, for example, are women.
We must be aware, however, that it is not women who take the decisions that lead to these situations because, as Mrs Gomes's extremely interesting report makes very clear, there are practically no women in the places where decisions are taken on international policy, despite the recommendations of the Beijing Action Programme and Resolution 1325 of the United Nations Security Council and despite the fact that, according to experts, women have a particular gift for negotiation and reaching agreements.
It is a paradox that the majority of NGOs that play an active role in peace negotiations and post-conflict processes are made up of women. The EU institutions must support these women, as the report points out.
It is urgent that we take all the necessary measures to ensure that there is a balance between men and women in all areas where decisions that affect our collective fate are taken. An absence of women represents a democratic deficit.
The measures proposed by the report in this regard are very courageous and interesting and they are very much in line with those being taken by the government of my country, Spain.
Congratulations, Mrs Gomes.
(PL) Madam President, 'Women represent half the potential talent and skills of humanity and their under-representation in decision-making is a loss for society as a whole.' This is a quote from the Athens Ministerial Declaration, which was signed 14 years ago. In spite of many similar political declarations, special action programmes and corresponding legislation, the phenomenon of gender discrimination has not disappeared.
Out of nearly 44 000 members of parliament worldwide, only 16% are women. Out of the 191 countries that are currently members of the UN, only seven have a woman as a head of state and eight have a female head of government. The under-representation of women in the political and decision-making process is sometimes associated with the difficulties of trying to balance one's social, family and work life, and is also often the result of discrimination at work and in professional education.
The European Union should set an example to the world in terms of equal opportunities and democracy. However, even here, in the European Parliament, women make up only 30% of MEPs. Some countries, such as Cyprus or Malta, have no female representatives at all. The Member States and political parties throughout Europe should aim to achieve a so-called 'balanced participation' of 40 to 60% of each gender on their lists of candidates. Then social representation would really be equitable.
I would like to congratulate Mrs Gomes on her excellent report. I hope it will contribute to changing the situation of women in political life.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow.


2. Draft amending budget No 8/2008 (


Adjournment of the session
I declare the session of the European Parliament adjourned. In view of the weather conditions, I would like to wish my fellow Members a safe journey home. I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a good beginning to what will, hopefully, be a prosperous 2011.
(The sitting was suspended at 16:35)


8. Trafficking in human beings (vote)


Application of the Schengen acquis - Application of the Schengen acquis in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (continuation of debate)
The next item is the debate on the Council Declaration on application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, and on the report by Carlos Coelho on the application of the Schengen acquis in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia.
(PL) Mr President, I should like to begin by thanking the Portuguese Government for the technical solution it proposed regarding the transitional period. This will allow the new Member States to join SIS before the end of the current year, in advance of the new system being confirmed and implemented by the Commission.
I am pleased for my fellow citizens who will be travelling back to Poland for Christmas. This time they will be spared having to spend long hours queuing waiting to cross the border on the way home.
All this has only become possible, however, because following the initial difficulties experienced, each and every one of the countries involved has set to and tackled the problems arising in connection with implementation of the SIS system, adapting it to local conditions.
(SK) I would also like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the Portuguese Presidency for its initiative and for finding a solution by proposing SISone4all, which enabled nine new Member States to join the Schengen area.
The historic significance of this step for the citizens of those countries cannot be doubted. Not only does it make the principle of free movement of people a reality, it also represents a historic step towards the reunification of Europe.
I would also like to thank the rapporteur, Carlos Coelho, for his excellent work and for a remarkable grasp of all the issues. Thanks are also due to Commissioner Frattini for his great commitment and all the help with fulfilling the Schengen criteria.
It was stressed a few times in the report that joining the Schengen area was a matter of mutual trust and I believe that trust is also the underlying theme of our present debate. It is quite clear that border security is not just an issue of technology but also of mutual trust. However, this works both ways. More technologically advanced systems would also undoubtedly help individual Member States to trust the countries protecting the security of the Union's external borders. We must therefore ask why and how much longer we have to wait for SIS II, which will increase security and facilitate both judicial and police cooperation between Member States in this area. Prolonging the existence of temporary solutions is both costly and inadequate compensation for the non-existence of SIS II.
I also want to support the amendment tabled on the fulfilment of the Schengen criteria, which states that Parliament should be informed within six months of the assessment of the situation in the Member States. We should not see a repeat of the situation when the Commission did not want to provide the Parliament with information that was vital for its decision-making.
Mr President, the joy of the magnificent Christmas present among the 21st century new European citizens is understandable. The expansion of the Schengen area - this special Portuguese flavour - is a historic event of great psychological and symbolic magnitude, lifting not only the borders and divisions in Europe.
Yet, whilst for us it is now possible to travel from the Baltic Vilnius to the Atlantic Lisbon, a new European curtain is being pulled in front of Ukraine, Russia, Moldova and Belarus, a financial and bureaucratic one in place of that very old iron. Not so long ago, our neighbours could travel visa-free to many new Schengen countries, but now they must pay between EUR 35 and 60. This is a quarter or even a third of a monthly salary in some of these countries. We do not need the fortress of Europe while the Schengen acquis, with some improvements, is the key to a stronger and more inclusive Europe.
(LT) I cannot help welcoming and rejoicing at the eminent enlargement of the Schengen area, which is due to take place at the end of this year. The concepts of 'Schengen' and 'roaming' are the notions best understood by EU citizens. They can see them actually working; everyone has been influenced by them in one way or another. For most Europeans they are closely associated with the notion of a united Europe.
The accession of nine new Member States is a historical step not just for Lithuania, but for Europe as a whole. For Lithuania it spells another sequential step towards deeper European integration. The preparation has required a lot of work and effort. I am glad that the experts have assessed these efforts and found them to be acceptable and that all nine candidates will be able to join, having successfully 'passed the test'. I would like to thank the presiding country, Portugal, for having come up with the solution regarding the Schengen Information System, which has prevented our countries from wasting several years.
(PL) Mr President, it emerges from the report by Mr Coelho that nine new Member States are properly prepared for their land borders to be opened on 21 December this year and for their air borders to be opened on 30 March 2008.
Despite earlier concerns, all these countries have managed to catch up and establish an information system allowing data to be exchanged between organisations responsible for protection of the Union's external borders.
Consequently, the principle of the free movement of persons will be implemented approximately three years after these countries acceded to the Union. I would remind the House that this is one of the four key principles governing the operation of the European Union.
It was also a good thing that the Council of the European Union responded to the European Parliament's hopes, taking the formal decision to open the borders during the night between 20 and 21 December of this year. This will be a very special Christmas present for the many thousands of Europeans travelling between the old and the new Member States during the Christmas and New Year holiday period.
(MT) I would like to start by joining my fellow Members in thanking and expressing my best wishes to Mr Coelho for the useful work that he has done.
Mr President, the enlargement of the Schengen area is not just another historical step in Europe's development; more than that, it is a major acquisition for European citizens, as it gives them new rights. Mr President, we sometimes forget that there was once a time when, wherever you went in Europe, immigration officials would stamp your passport. In order to leave your country and enter it again you had to fill in an embarkation form to advise authorities where you were going and how long you would be away. On arrival you again passed through immigration control, waited in the queue and were then quizzed: why have you come, what are you going to do, how long are you staying? They almost treated you with suspicion rather than welcoming you, which annoyed many people.
On returning to your country you went through the same thing, with controls in the country of departure and controls when you returned to your own country. We should not forget as well that until a short while ago customs officials checked your baggage, asking you what you had bought, how much you had spent, as if you had some form of contraband.
Mr President, this is not 50 years ago; this is just a short time ago. Now, finally, the controls are going to end once and for all. This means that a country is in the Schengen area. When you travel within the Schengen area, you are as free as you are within your own country; you leave your country, you arrive in another, and you return without controls, without stamps, without borders, without questions. The sense of freedom brought by the freedom of movement without controls is a major acquisition that we really appreciate as one of the greatest successes of the European Union. More and more, for those of us who come from islands, Schengen unites us, builds a bridge between the periphery and the centre; for us, Schengen means a sense of liberty, it means a sense of liberation.
- (SK) The creation of the Schengen area, which does away with controls at the internal borders between all the participating states and thus makes free movement of persons a reality throughout the EU territory, can rightly be considered to be one of the EU's greatest achievements.
The citizens of the countries joining that area in December will welcome our decision as one that is in the interests of the people, making their right to free movement a reality. However, the enlargement of the Schengen area also requires the introduction of some compensatory measures, including the introduction of effective controls at the external borders, better cooperation between the administration, police, customs and judicial authorities, a common visa policy and the creation of the Schengen Information System. The Slovak Government has, according to all the assessments, completed the preparatory phase very successfully and I am honoured to be able to declare in the European Parliament today that the Slovak Republic is fully prepared to join the Schengen area.
(LT) Today we are about to finalise the discussion on the application of the Schengen aquis provisions in the new Member States. I welcome the fact that all the hard work put in by those countries about to join the Schengen area, together with the efforts of the existing Member States and the Commission, has led to victory.
The creation of the Schengen area is one of the EU's biggest projects. In order to facilitate its implementation after the expansion in 2004, when we were having difficulties with the realisation of SIS II, the Member States demonstrated true solidarity; Portugal proposed the SISone4all version, enabling the borders to be opened between the 15 existing Member States and the nine new ones before next Christmas.
This means increased freedom of movement within Europe, and it is also a rational decision, preventing new Member States from incurring losses because of the delay in setting a date for the application of SIS II. SISone4all, which is due to operate for nearly a year, will facilitate the movement of persons while at the same time having a beneficial impact on the countries' economic growth.
(ET) Ladies and gentlemen, the enlargement of Schengen is an event for all 500 million Europeans and, in fact, for the whole world. By removing controls on its internal borders, the European Union is putting an end to an age which was characterised by division and opposition - East and West.
I spent my childhood and teenage years in the Soviet Union. I remember the anxiety engendered by the knowledge that the land and sky were closed off, that the soldiers of the army of occupation were protecting the iron curtain. The accession to Schengen marks the final liberation from the past. The disappearance of borders is a powerful symbol for 75 million Europeans.
The nine countries acceding to Schengen are ready to take on the changes in data exchange which go hand in hand with the privilege of free movement. My home country, Estonia, protects one of our external borders. I am nevertheless disappointed that this historic occasion has been split into two smaller events for no convincing reason because air frontiers will not, of course, disappear for eastern Europeans until the end of next March.
(MT) I wish to share some ideas regarding Schengen and the way in which I see it. For me, it is not just a matter of what is in the Treaty and what it will provide or the rules that are applied; I see it as part of a process, part of an important process to include diverse European States - in this case two EFTA states - and help them to feel more integrated and move closer to each other. Although we have this independent and sovereign quality, we should on the other hand be proud that we are part of something whole. In this case, entry and exit through common borders - because they are going to become common borders - are part of a process like that of the Euro, part of a process through which my country became part of Europe. We should all be proud that we form part of such a wise continent that also exports the values that it believes in.
President-in-Office of the Council. - (PT) Mr President, Mr Vice-President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that there is total consensus in this House that the imminent enlargement is not only historic but also highly symbolic. However, this consensus is not only institutional but, much more importantly, it is also social as it is what our citizens rightly want. It is right that the EU's bodies should listen to its citizens and respond in timely fashion to their aspirations. This is what we have done.
I am very grateful for the positive comments which have highly praised the work carried out not only by the Portuguese Presidency but also by all those who contributed at just the right time so that the many pieces of this complex puzzle could be readied and slotted together just as they should. Just one year ago we were facing a very different situation and it is not only a technological feat, which is in itself very important, but also a political feat that our institutions have achieved for our citizens, which reinforces the credibility of these institutions.
Secondly, I must stress that the new external borders are a great Christmas present for our citizens and will be so for many Christmases to come. However, they also provide a new way of managing external relations as we do not want to create a second generation Iron Curtain for our neighbours. What we have is the start of an electronic border, vigorous in its interception of criminals and flexible, like everything electronic, in allowing citizens in good faith to pass rapidly through, whoever they may be and wherever they may be coming from. This is the model that Europe is presenting to the world and this is the commitment to which we are bound.
Thirdly, this work and this achievement are based on meticulous preparation which has left the partner states in the SISone4all project very well provided with equipment and a police preparation logic which we must link with new measures, such as the reinforcement of Frontex recently announced by the Commission and our new model of integrated border management. This is therefore one more piece in a complex policy that must be pursued and developed.
Fourthly, I should like to underline that one of the secrets to the success of this project is being able to duly combine security and freedom, freedom of movement, much more freedom of movement, with appropriate data protection. The two things are inseparable. This is the way forward for Europe and it is fortunately also an important point of consensus between the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. There is no other way forward, only this one.
This rule is valid for SISone4all and will also be valid for SIS II, for the second generation Schengen Information System. This is obvious in the legislation approved with the seal of the European Parliament and is apparent from the suggestions made in the report prepared by Mr Coelho.
I must also say that this applies to the issue of managing confidentiality and transparency. Confidentiality and transparency can be balanced and an optimum balance must be achieved so that all decision-makers have the necessary information to make decisions in full knowledge of the facts. This has been achieved in this process and is surely a point which bodes well for future successes in an excellent relationship between the Commission and the Council on this essential point.
Finally, I must also once again stress the importance of the method that we have chosen. We have not run away from bad news or problems. In 2006 we realised that there was a serious problem and we took note of this serious problem. We did not adopt a 'blame-shame' attitude but instead tried to find positive solutions to the problems by ensuring exemplary cooperation among the institutions. I have no criticisms to make of the Commission's behaviour throughout the process and I consider that the Commission should have no criticisms to make of the Council's behaviour, as managed by the previous German, current Portuguese and future Slovenian Presidencies and other future presidencies. It is this kind of cooperation that I consider necessary to solve European problems.
To conclude, we must relish the victory and prepare for the future. I should therefore like to invite the representatives of this House to attend the commemoration, which will be held on 21 and 22 November. This will be a symbolic journey through sites that were previously symbols of closure and that will, from 21 December, be symbols of the freedom that is the air and oxygen breathing life and happiness into Europe.
Vice-President of the Commission. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. I too am extremely satisfied with the outcome of this debate.
The result which is within our reach today clearly shows that the countries about to join Schengen on 21 and 22 December, and their citizens, really do deserve this Christmas present, as it were. They deserve it because, whereas we have worked together over the past 12 to 15 months to overcome certain technical difficulties - and the Portuguese Presidency cannot be praised highly enough - they have played their part too. They have overcome difficulties and shortcomings - in airports, at border posts and in staff training - which just 12, 13 or 14 months ago seemed hard to overcome.
That is why they really do deserve what has charmingly been called a Christmas present, and I can say so having visited a number of border posts in person, together with many colleagues - Ministers of the Interior - who showed me the enormous progress made between one visit and the next. I believe that this development is of huge political importance for Europe and has a major social impact, in other words on the citizens. It is of huge political importance because, from 21 December onwards, each Member State will regard another Member State's external borders as its own. I, as an Italian, will regard the far-off border between Poland and Ukraine as my own. That will be my country's border: such is the political impact of this decision that Europe has managed to take within what is a very reasonable period of time.
Then there is the social impact, in other words the impact on our citizens' daily lives which, if I may say so, even goes beyond the symbolic effect of no longer having to queue up at border posts. It means that every law-abiding European citizen will feel at home in any other country of the European Union. It means freedom of movement and not having to show one's passport; it does not merely mean not having to queue up for border checks, but rather feeling that European citizenship has become a reality.
Many of you have raised the issue of security, and I entirely agree with what Mr Magalhães has just said. Security and freedom must obviously go hand-in-hand. The more we promote the expansion of this right, this great freedom, the more we must do to prevent criminals from making the most of this great freedom to step up their own dealings and unlawful activities.
That is why this Europe, this large Schengen area, will not be a fortress but certainly will protect EU citizens from criminal comings and goings. Furthermore, it is obvious for this reason that the Schengen system - currently the 'one for all' Schengen system and soon to be Schengen II - must be equipped with the best technology. Criminals tend to evade controls, of course, and we must have the technological instruments to prevent that from happening, such as the use of biometrics, showing full respect for everyone's freedom but in order - as it were - to ward off temptation.
One last word: I was struck by what has been said about Europe's neighbours. Clearly, an enlarged Schengen area must not engender the risk of shutting out those countries which now adjoin the expanded Schengen borders. As you know, we have to use this Schengen system to monitor and administer 80 000 km of EU external borders, and Frontex will play an ever greater role here. Just think what an enormous task that is, but we have to perform it. Well, this must not happen to the detriment of our neighbours, of the relationships some have mentioned: the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans.
We have therefore embarked on a new approach, and I would once again ask you, the European Parliament, now that you are giving the final green light to this action, to confirm your support for the policy which I proposed to the Council and which the Council of Ministers has endorsed. It is a new-style visa policy, aimed at facilitating the movement of honest people, accompanied by measures on document security, personal identification and the use of biometrics, but which offers citizens now living extremely close to but not within this European area a tangible opportunity to go occasionally to the theatre in Vienna or to see the Coliseum in Rome or to visit Lisbon, without the enormous difficulty and expense currently involved in obtaining a visa.
The new approach is as follows. Let us make visa policy an instrument of our neighbourhood policy, and let us do so at the same time as enlarging the Schengen area. This, in my opinion, would hopefully be another political, purely political, step; it is neither a bureaucratic nor a narrowly legal matter. It is a political message that we can send to other states and their citizens, who are watching us from Europe's neighbourhood but do not need to look on in envy because we are free to move around while they cannot even attend a university course in a European city.
In order to ensure that no such envy exists and that Europe is loved by its neighbours, let us accompany the enlargement of Schengen with a policy of friendship, using visas and greater freedom of movement as a strategic instrument.
To conclude the debate, I have received motions for a resolutionfrom five political groups pursuant to Rule 103(2).
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday at 12 noon.
Written statements (Rule 142)
in writing. - (HU) We can still remember the fear we felt when we crossed the iron curtain of the time with valid passports in our pockets. The passport was valid in vain, and we got all the stamps in it in vain, because something could always happen at the border. Or, if not, we were afraid of it because crossing the border was an extraordinary event in Europe.
Since the iron curtain came down, border traffic has become simpler, but the checks have remained, and the borders can still only be crossed at a few designated places, which primarily made life more difficult for the people living there. Now that has ended too, and the borders - as Hungarian democrats have wanted for many decades - have 'turned into thin air'. From now on we shall also find it natural that the people who live near the border can go across into another country just as naturally as from, let's say, Budapest to Budakeszi by car, by the number 22 bus or on foot using footpaths.
Complete freedom of movement without checks is particularly important for people belonging to the same nation who live on both sides of the border. Recently we have not adopted much legislation that is more important than this, and I am proud that I can be part of this wonderful process!


Voting time
The next item is voting time.
(For the outcome and other details of the vote: see Minutes)
(FR) Mr President, excuse me, I am not sure under which Rule I should address the House but I would like to make a statement to the presidency about the current situation in Parliament: it is turning into a permanent circus, which makes it very difficult to work calmly when trying to do serious things here.
(Applause)
I think that this situation reached its peak yesterday evening and I would ask the presidency to take action in order to restore calm and a serious atmosphere in a House that should be an example to the whole world and that should be a serious House, not a circus.
(Applause)
I imagine, Mr Hutchinson, that you are referring to the various displays in the passageways and corridors. You know that the Quaestors are responsible in this regard. We will of course pass on your comments.
(FR) Mr President, I would also like to make a comment about calm and order in our work. Our sitting yesterday afternoon was marked by an extremely moving account, but the disruption to the agenda meant that the speeches on topics as important as the financial crisis were postponed by more than two hours, totally interfering with the order of speakers. That does not help things to run smoothly in this House.
In this case, I will pass on your comments not to the Quaestors but to the Conference of Presidents as that is the body responsible for such matters.


7. Agenda for new skills and jobs (


2. Civil, commercial, family and private international law aspects of the action plan implementing the Stockholm Programme (
- Before the vote:
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, due to the change in the agenda approved yesterday by this House, I would firstly like to express my approval for the fact that the Committee on Legal Affairs has unanimously approved the draft report that we are voting on today.
The fact that the construction of the European judicial space finds such a broad consensus in Parliament is important. The Stockholm Programme envisages that everyday life should be intrinsic to the process of constructing a Europe of citizens and not merely of political forces or institutional representations. It sets out to resolve the everyday problems of Europeans by the real and unified creation of an effective market of labour, goods and services, entrepreneurial activity without internal borders and without red tape, to strengthen the common basis of rights of succession, contracts, consumers, timely payments, the family, children and more.
It will also be the duty and responsibility of the justice system, national judiciaries, solicitors, accountants and workers who operate within individual States to build Europe, to interpret the laws that unite our continent. Our past is marked by different judicial and legal traditions - Common law and Civil law - with differences between the French or German systems and histories that are sometimes very different. We respect national prerogatives and the principle of subsidiarity, but we realise that in order to build Europe - and fortunately we are still on that road - we need progressive convergence that is based on the great constitutional tradition of fundamental rights for which Europe stands.
Mr President, the Action Plan that we will approve sets out to construct, reinforce, extend and disseminate a solid European judicial culture, a European legal mindset. That is why I will vote in favour.


15. Situation in the beekeeping sector (vote)


8. Draft amending budget No 4/2009 (