Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

It-Tlieta, 24 ta' Marzu 2009 - Strasburgu

15. Istruzzjonijiet konsulari komuni: elementi ta' identifikazzjoni bijometriċi u applikazzjonijiet għal viża (dibattitu)

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle la recommandation pour la deuxième lecture de la commission des libertés civiles, de la justice et des affaires intérieures sur les instructions consulaires communes: éléments d'identification biométriques et demandes de visa [05329/1/2009 - C6-0088/2009 - 2006/0088(COD)] Rapporteur: Sarah Ludford (A6-0143/2009)

  Sarah Ludford, rapporteur. − Madam President, this Commission proposal, on which I am Parliament’s rapporteur, is the fourth element of the Visa Information System (VIS) package, coming after the VIS regulation, the VIS access decision and the measure on the use of the VIS under the Schengen Borders Code.

In modifying the existing common consular instructions, it provides firstly for the obligation to supply biometrics which will be stored in the VIS and the standards for doing so, but secondly it includes provisions on the organisation of receiving visa applications.

A complete revision of the visa rules is foreseen with the visa code on which my ALDE Group colleague, Henrik Lax, is rapporteur. Once adopted, this piece of legislation which we are now discussing will become an integral part of the visa code. The underlying rationale for separating the proposals was that the Commission expected the adoption of the visa code to take longer than the present proposal, and they did not want the adoption of the visa code to hold up the launch of the VIS.

It is my understanding that the central system for the VIS will be ready by December this year and could start operating in the first region, North Africa, in early 2010. I have been negotiating with the Council for quite a long time. The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted my report in November 2007. Unfortunately we could not get a first-reading agreement, so in July 2008 I asked Parliament to endorse my report; however, during the French Presidency we were able to make sufficient progress for me to be able to recommend adopting this compromise at second reading.

We had four outstanding issues: the age limit for fingerprinting; encouraging Member States to cooperate while permitting contracts with external providers as a last resort; data protection and security; and a service fee for external providers.

On fingerprinting the Commission proposed to start fingerprinting children at six years old. In fact fingerprints of young children are subject to rapid change, and I have not been persuaded that enough is yet known about the reliability in later years of prints taken so young. Despite many requests, I was never provided with credible substantive evidence about how fingerprints taken between six and twelve years of age could be the basis for verification or identification many years later without the risk of mistakes.

The Council’s reaction at one stage was to propose fingerprinting young children every two years instead of five years, as is the case with adults, but that would be hugely inconvenient for families. So I insisted on a prudent and practical approach, taking a higher minimum age of twelve years, and the Council did agree to exempt children under twelve, with a review of this age limit after three years following a detailed study under the responsibility of the Commission.

I now turn to the issue of encouraging Member State cooperation while permitting external providers. I do not have any problems with the general concept of outsourcing, but there must be secure conditions to ensure the integrity of the visa-issuing process, to ensure that outsourcing is only a last resort and that data protection and security are guaranteed.

We therefore succeeded in writing into the text a hierarchy whereby cooperation by means of limited representation, co-location or common application centres is the first choice, and only where those solutions are not appropriate to cope with a high number of applicants or secure a good geographical coverage does outsourcing come into play. The compromise makes clear that Member States remain responsible for compliance with data protection rules and for any breaches of national law.

An important element is that, in third states that prohibit encryption, special rules apply: electronic transfer of data between consulates or between an external service provider and the Member State would be banned, and Member States would have to ensure that the electronic data is transferred physically in fully encrypted form on a CD which has special conditions attached to it.

Lastly, on the visa fee, we have successfully insisted, as a condition for the external provider’s imposing a service fee on top of the visa fee, that visa applicants should always have the possibility of direct access to the consulate offices. I think that is very important.

Overall we have a reasonable deal. Compromises were hard-fought, and I think we have made a step forward on the common visa policy.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, first of all I would like to convey the regrets of Vice-President Barrot for being unable to be with you tonight.

I am pleased to note that Parliament has accepted the Council’s common position and thus given shape to the political agreement which it and the Council reached on this proposal during the trialogue on 2 December 2008. I would thank both Parliament and the Member States for the spirit of compromise they showed in achieving the formal adoption of this instrument, and in particular I should like to thank the rapporteur, Baroness Ludford, and the co-rapporteurs for their support and cooperation. This agreement will allow preparations to continue for the launch of the Visa Information System scheduled for the end of this year.

At Parliament’s suggestion, the Commission has asked the Joint Research Centre to study the important question of fingerprinting children under the age of 12. The technical specifications have now been drafted and will be sent to Parliament and the Council in the very near future.

This change to the common consular instructions will also provide a transparent and harmonised legal framework for the practice of outsourcing, including the question of the extra fee.

The Commission considers that the text agreed upon is balanced and, as set out in the Commission’s statement to Parliament, attracts the Commission’s full support.

  Ewa Klamt, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Um dem Anspruch der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts in der Europäischen Union Rechnung zu tragen, ist es unsere Aufgabe, auch die Vergabe von Einreisevisa für Bürger, die von außerhalb Europas in die EU einreisen wollen, zu regeln. Die neu geschaffenen Regeln sehen vor, dass die EU-Botschaften und EU-Vertretungen zukünftig Fingerabdrücke und Fotos von den Antragstellern nehmen. Damit werden vier Ziele erreicht.

Erstens, Betrug und Missbrauch werden so besser bekämpft, da biometrische Identifikatoren die Fälschung von Visa erschweren. Zweitens, das so genannte Visa-Shopping wird verhindert. Drittens, die Verfahren der Visumbeantragung werden beschleunigt. Viertens, gleichzeitig werden die Grenzkontrollen erleichtert, denn biometrische Identifikatoren geben den Grenzbeamten die schnelle Möglichkeit, festzustellen, ob die betreffende Person auch die Person ist, der das Visum ausgestellt wurde.

Wir wären gern dem Vorschlag der Kommission gefolgt, bei Kindern bereits ab sechs Jahren Fingerabdrücke zu nehmen, um die Gefahr des Menschenhandels auszuschließen. Leider fand sich dafür keine Mehrheit im Haus.

Die EVP-ED-Fraktion unterstützt mit breiter Mehrheit den gefundenen Kompromiss, dass ein Mitgliedstaat, der für die Entgegennahme und Bearbeitung von Anträgen zuständig ist, als letztes Mittel auch die Möglichkeit erhalten muss, mit externen Dienstleistern zusammenzuarbeiten. Entscheidend für unsere Zustimmung zu einer solchen Zusammenarbeit ist, dass die Mitgliedstaaten auch in diesem Fall für den Datenschutz und die Datensicherheit verantwortlich sind. Das bedeutet, dass die elektronischen Daten vom externen Dienstleistungserbringer an die Behörden des betreffenden Mitgliedstaats grundsätzlich nur vollständig verschlüsselt übermittelt werden dürfen.

Ich möchte der Berichterstatterin und auch den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der anderen Fraktionen danken, die als Schattenberichterstatter drei Jahre lang an diesem Projekt gearbeitet haben!

  Roselyne Lefrançois, au nom du groupe PSE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, Madame la Présidente, vous présidez cette séance, et c'est donc à votre place que j'interviens sur ce dossier que vous avez suivi en tant que rapporteur pour avis.

Je tiens tout d'abord à féliciter chaleureusement Sarah Ludford pour l'énergie déployée et les résultats obtenus dans la négociation difficile de ce dossier. Je crois que le Parlement européen peut être fier des résultats obtenus car la tâche était loin d'être aisée, nous l'avons constaté.

Je soulignerai en particulier deux points qui me paraissent essentiels et sur lesquels nous pouvons nous estimer particulièrement satisfaits. Premièrement, l'élévation de la limite d'âge pour le prélèvement des empreintes des mineurs de six à douze ans; et, deuxièmement, la fixation du principe selon lequel la sous-traitance de la collecte des données biométriques par les consulats des États membres à des organismes privés ne pourra se faire qu'en dernier ressort et dans le cadre strict d'un certain nombre de garanties bien précises.

Je sais que d'aucuns considèrent que la solution adoptée ne rejoint pas complètement les options que nous avions proposées, notamment s'agissant de la collecte par un prestataire de services, dans un siège diplomatique, et le transfert des données par courrier électronique crypté, voire par support électronique crypté transporté dans une valise diplomatique.

On relèvera toutefois que la collecte par des organismes privés ne pourra se faire que dans le respect de la législation européenne et que les données devront être entièrement chiffrées par le prestataire et transmises aux autorités de l'État membre.

En outre, nous avons obtenu la référence à la nécessité de négocier des accords avec les pays tiers qui interdisent le chiffrement des données transmises par voie électronique. L'examen des demandes, les entretiens éventuels, la procédure d'autorisation ainsi que l'impression et l'apposition des vignettes visa seront effectués uniquement par la représentation diplomatique ou consulaire.

Les mêmes conditions s'appliquent pour la transmission des données collectées d'un État membre à un autre, dans le cas de colocalisations, c'est-à-dire la représentation d'un État membre par un autre dans un pays tiers.

Enfin, si les conditions détaillées pour l'activité des prestataires de services sont décrites dans une annexe au texte, elles devront globalement être définies par un instrument juridique cadre contraignant.

Au vu de ces résultats, nous ne pouvons que nous réjouir des garanties ainsi obtenues dans le sens d'une meilleure politique des visas en Europe, qui bénéficiera très certainement aux citoyens européens et permettra d'améliorer nos relations avec les pays tiers.

  Tatjana Ždanoka, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, first of all, on behalf of my group, I would like to thank Baroness Ludford for her good cooperation. She is one of the few rapporteurs for whom nothing is impossible.

You know that my group strongly opposes the extensive introduction of biometrics. Nevertheless, the decision has been already adopted. The legal basis for the collection of fingerprints when issuing visas is provided for by the Visa Information System Regulation which, in our opinion, would be a more appropriate place to include provisions specifying both general rules and exceptions.

Now, for us, it is crucial to obtain as many safeguards as possible. Here Baroness Ludford has done an excellent job. For us the change of the minimum age for fingerprinting from 6 to 12 is very important – but 14 would have been even better.

We also welcome explicit references to fundamental rights, such as the possibility of copying data from the previous application if the last entry is not older than 59 months instead of 48, as well as guarantees for secure data protection.

However, we have many concerns. My group does not like outsourcing the collection of biometric identifiers, especially on premises without diplomatic and consular protection. We also oppose the charging of an additional service fee.

To sum up, we believe that the introduction of biometrics in visas has crucial implications for data security and for fundamental rights without demonstrating any significant gains. Therefore, we cannot support Parliament’s position at second reading. However, this does not prejudice our position on the Lax report on the visa code.

  Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch ich schätze die engagierte Arbeit unserer Berichterstatterin sehr und möchte ihr und allen recht herzlich für die ausgezeichnete Zusammenarbeit in den letzten Jahren danken. Dennoch werde ich mich bei der Abstimmung der Stimme enthalten, und zwar vor allem deshalb, weil ich die Abnahme von Fingerabdrücken und den gesamten Umgang mit biometrischen Identifikatoren für nicht verhältnismäßig halte. Ich finde die von Innenministern und Sicherheitsbehörden gewollte und stetig geförderte Sammelwut im Hinblick auf persönliche Daten grundsätzlich bedenklich.

Ich weiß, wie schwierig es war, dem Rat den Kompromiss abzuringen, wonach Kinder unter zwölf Jahren von der Pflicht zur Abnahme von Fingerabdrücken befreit werden. Wir alle wissen aber auch, dass dies nur gilt, solange keine umfassenden Studien vorliegen, die wirklich belegen, dass Fingerabdrücke von Kindern zuverlässig sind. Die politische Diskussion darüber, ob man Fingerabdrücke schon von Babys und von kleinen Kindern tatsächlich benötigt, ist also nicht abgeschlossen.

Sorgen bereiten mir auch die Regelungen zum outsourcing. Einheitliche strikte Regelungen dazu sind sicher notwendig, denn bereits heute nutzen einige Mitgliedstaaten externe Dienstleister. Es ist nachvollziehbar, dass es in manchen, eng begrenzten Fällen durchaus nützlich sein kann, die Abwicklung von Visaanträgen an externe Dienstleister zu übertragen, nur darf diese Praxis nicht zu Lasten der Antragsteller und der Datensicherheit gehen. Den diesbezüglichen Kompromiss mit dem Rat halte ich insofern für nicht ausreichend. Sowohl der Rechtsdienst des Parlaments als auch der Europäische Datenschutzbeauftragte haben auf die Gefahren hingewiesen, die das outsourcing mit sich bringt, wenn die externe Dienstleistung nicht auf diplomatisch geschütztem Gebiet stattfindet. Leider wurden diese Bedenken vom Rat ignoriert.

Ein weiteres Problem ist die mit dem outsourcing verbundene Dienstleistungsgebühr. Ich halte es für falsch, diese Gebühr den Antragstellerinnen und Antragstellern aufzubürden. Schon die Visagebühr von 60 Euro ist für viele Drittstaatangehörige zu hoch oder nur schwer bezahlbar. Wenn darüber hinaus noch eine Gebühr in Höhe von bis zu 30 Euro dazukommt, dann entspricht das nicht meiner Vorstellung von einem offenen und gastfreundlichen Europa. Es kann zweifellos gerade bei sehr großen Staaten durchaus eine Erleichterung sein, wenn man nicht durch das halbe Land zu einem Konsulat reisen muss, um ein Visum zu beantragen, sondern den Antrag stattdessen bei einem externen Dienstleister einreichen kann. Doch noch höhere Gebühren würden diesen Vorteil meines Erachtens gleich wieder zunichte machen.

Vielen Dank an alle für die Zusammenarbeit an diesem Dossier in den letzten Jahren!

  Gerard Batten, on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. – Madam President, it comes as no surprise to hear Baroness Ludford of the Euro-fanatic Liberal Democrat party wanting to harmonise yet another area of what should be sovereign national policy. Why on earth would any EU Member State want a common system for the application and processing of visas for third-party nationals? Deciding who can and cannot enter a nation state should be the sole concern of the nation state – except that, in the minds of the Euro-fanatics, European nation states no longer exist, having been replaced by the great EU borderless state.

Since 1997, about 6 million migrants have entered the UK. About 4 million have left, leaving a net population increase of over 2 million. The current immigration rate to Britain now results in a net population gain of over 200 000 people per year – or a net population gain of over 1 million people every five years. This is equivalent to a new city the size of Birmingham. Most of these migrants enter legally, because they are EU citizens. In addition to that, we probably have one million illegal immigrants. England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world – more densely populated than India, China or Japan. On current trends, our population of 61 million is set to rise to 75 million by 2051, and is projected to rise to 85 million by 2081.

What we need is to leave the European Union and regain control of our borders. Having done that, we need to decide which countries’ citizens we allow in, with or without a visa. There are many Member States in the EU whose citizens should not be allowed into Britain without a visa. What Britain needs is a strict visa system so that we can decide who we allow into our country and who we do not. What we do not need is a system devised by the European Union.

I expect that its advocates would justify it as merely introducing common criteria and processes to make everything run more smoothly. However, it might have some unintended consequences. Look at another example of EU legislation championed by the Liberal Democrats. The European arrest warrant means that British citizens accused of a crime by other EU Member States cannot now be protected by British courts or even the Home Secretary, even when it is obvious that a grave injustice is being done. Any corrupt legal system may now demand the surrender of a British citizen, and we have to comply. We have surrendered the right to protect our own citizens. Soon we will have trials in absentia and the common recognition of fines and confiscation orders. All this was voted for and welcomed by the Liberal Democrats. These measures overturn the most basic freedoms enjoyed by the English for centuries, as enshrined in Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights.

This afternoon, Graham Watson, leader of the Liberal Democrats, urged Gordon Brown to take Britain into the European single currency, which is something that anyone in touch with the real world would know is economic suicide. Now the Liberal Democrat fanatics want us to embrace a common system for the application of visas. When the London voters become aware of Baroness Ludford’s position on these issues, hopefully they will grant her a one-way visa out of the European Parliament in the European elections on 4 June 2009.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE). - Senhora Comissária, caras e caros Colegas, concordo que é urgente que o VIS possa iniciar operações, e precisamos de um código comunitário de vistos. Reconheço o trabalho da Baronesa Ludford, mas, em consciência, não posso apoiar o compromisso por várias razões.

Primeiro, discordo do recurso a external service providers. Quando aprovámos o SIS II, com o acordo de todos os grupos políticos, este Parlamento não aceitou que entidades privadas pudessem ter acesso aos dados, e tratava-se, na altura, apenas de matrículas de automóveis, o que justifica a mudança radical de posição do Parlamento, permitindo que entidades privadas possam proceder à recolha destes dados, tratando-se de dados pessoais sensíveis, como é o caso de impressões digitais. Essas empresas poderão reter esses dados durante uma semana, de acordo com as circunstâncias previstas no compromisso.

Segundo, devia haver melhor protecção de dados. A protecção diplomática é essencial para se poder garantir uma efectiva protecção dos direitos pessoais dos indivíduos. Como é que se pode garantir a protecção dos dados recolhidos por empresas privadas, uma vez que não foi consagrada essa protecção diplomática? Já nos esquecemos do caso SWIFT, com a transmissão de dados recolhidos por autoridades americanas? Se este tipo de situação aconteceu num país como os Estados Unidos, imaginemos o que poderá acontecer em países menos desenvolvidos e com menor protecção dos direitos fundamentais.

Terceiro, sobe o custo dos vistos e muda de país para país. A proposta da Comissão visava prevenir o visa shopping. Ao dar às entidades privadas a possibilidade de cobrar uma taxa que irá ser adicionada ao preço do visto, irá criar-se uma diferença entre o custo dos vistos de Estado-Membro para Estado-Membro. Estaremos assim a incentivar aquilo que efectivamente queríamos combater, isto é, o visa shopping. Se num Estado o custo do visto forem 60 euros e no outro forem 90, onde irão concentrar-se a maior parte dos pedidos? Sobretudo no caso de famílias com vários membros. Para não falar na necessidade de rever os acordos de facilitação de vistos que tanto foram apoiados por este Parlamento, como é o caso da Ucrânia e da Sérvia.

Por isso tudo, Senhora Presidente, não posso aceitar este compromisso.

  Corina Creţu (PSE). - Doresc mai întâi să o felicit pe dna raportor pentru munca sa în vederea constituirii cadrului juridic care va sta la baza implementării sistemului de identificare biometrică.

Unele aspecte din acest raport au provocat dezbateri aprinse în numeroase ţări membre ale Uniunii Europene, mai ales cele referitoare la identificarea biometrică. Astfel de dispute au avut loc recent şi în România, care este penultima ţară din Uniunea Europeană ce introduce paşaportul biometric, dar prima care implementează un nou standard de biometrie cu amprente de la ambele mâini şi expresia facială.

Preocuparea pentru adoptarea sistemului de identificare biometrică are la bază îngrijorarea firească referitoare la asigurarea securităţii persoanelor, după cum firească este şi îngrijorarea privind modul în care sunt folosite şi protejate datele obţinute.

Una din cele mai importante datorii ale statelor membre este de a asigura siguranţa cetăţenilor lor, dar fără a pune în pericol drepturile fundamentale ale omului. De aceea, cred că este de datoria noastră să găsim calea echilibrului între cele două elemente esenţiale ale vieţii noastre: libertatea şi siguranţa.

Raportul pe care îl dezbatem astăzi este un raport mai degrabă tehnic, menit să armonizeze măsurile la nivel european în privinţa identificării biometrice. Acest lucru se impune, având în vedere că o serie de state membre practică deja această metodă, în absenţa unui cadru legislativ european în domeniu.

Faptul că, de exemplu, copiii cu vârste mai mici de 12 ani şi persoanele ce se află în imposibilitatea fizică de a fi amprentate vor fi exceptaţi de la prelevarea de amprente pentru vize biometrice este o dovadă de moderaţie şi pragmatism care trebuie extinsă în ansamblul statelor membre.

  Hubert Pirker (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Ich sehe mit der Verordnung vor allem zwei Ziele erreicht, nämlich mehr Sicherheit auf der einen Seite und größere Bürgerfreundlichkeit auf der anderen Seite.

Mit dem Eintragen von Fingerabdrücken und mit dem Eintragen des Bildes erreichen wir, dass die neuen Visa fälschungs- und missbrauchssicher werden. Bürgerfreundlich meine ich deshalb, weil wir mit dem Vorschlag erreichen, dass es ein One-stop-Verfahren gibt, das heißt, dass die notwendigen Daten auf einmal aufgenommen werden. Dazu kommt, dass man nicht jedes Mal zu der Stelle gehen muss, weil die Daten nämlich bis zu fünf Jahre lang gespeichert werden können.

Ich erachte es auch als bürgerfreundlicher, wenn die Wege verkürzt werden, indem man eben die Kooperation der Mitgliedstaaten fördert oder auch externe Dienstleister beauftragen kann, sofern die Datenschutzbestimmungen eingehalten werden. Und sie werden mit Garantie eingehalten! Dafür ist die notwendige Vorsorge getroffen. Ich kann auch alle beruhigen, die befürchten, dass über externe Dienstleister Missbrauch betrieben wird oder die Bestimmungen nicht eingehalten werden. Ich kann Ihnen von meinem Land sagen, dass wir hier durchaus positive Erfahrungen gemacht haben. Daher unterstütze ich diesen Weg als einen, der zu mehr Bürgerfreundlichkeit führt.

Bis hierher unterstütze ich auch die Berichterstatterin, der ich gratuliere, was ja in unserer Zusammenarbeit nicht immer der Fall ist, Frau Ludford. Was mir aber weniger gefällt, ist der Punkt, dass wir von Kindern ab sechs Jahren keine Fingerabdrücke abnehmen können – ganz einfach deshalb, weil wir mehr Sicherheit für die Kinder erreichen würden, weil die Identität eindeutig festgestellt werden könnte und wir damit Kinderhandel und anderen kriminellen Aktionen vorbeugen würden. Das bedaure ich! Ich hoffe aber, dass nach dem Vorliegen einer Studie und nach spätestens drei Jahren alle so vernünftig sein werden, dass es möglich wird, zum Schutz der Kinder bereits ab dem sechsten Lebensjahr Fingerabdrücke abzunehmen.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (PSE). - Decizia Consiliului nr. 512 din 8 iunie 2004 a creat cadrul legal pentru capturarea datelor biometrice pentru identificarea persoanelor.

Regulamentul european pe care îl discutăm defineşte standarde comune pentru colectarea datelor biometrice pentru identificare persoanelor şi se bazează pe prevederile relevante ale Organizaţiei Aviaţiei Civile Internaţionale.

Marea Britanie şi Irlanda nu vor aplica prevederile prezentului regulament pentru că lor nu li se aplică acquis-ul Schengen.

Cred că este important pentru acest regulament, în special, respectarea protecţiei datelor cu caracter personal. Practic, stocarea şi prelucrarea acestor date trebuie să se facă cu respectarea legislaţiei europene specifice şi, de asemenea, faptul că statele membre sunt responsabile pentru organizarea primirii şi procesării aplicaţiei pentru vize conferă statelor membre o foarte mare responsabilitate vis-a-vis de respectarea drepturilor persoanelor.

Vreau doar să menţionez faptul că este extrem de important ca prelucrarea şi colectarea acestor date să se facă de către personal autorizat şi în niciun caz să nu fie utilizate în alte scopuri.

  Душана Здравкова (PPE-DE). - Г-жо Комисар, колеги, постигнатият компромис по отношение на въвеждането на биометричните данни при издаване на входни визи от държавите-членки на Европейския съюз безспорно осигурява по-висока степен на сигурност.

В същото време се осигуряват и достатъчно възможности за опазване на личните данни и неприкосновеността на личността на пътуващите. Искам да отбележа, че във всички случаи подобряването на техническите изисквания ще допринесе за противодействие на трансграничната престъпност, незаконната имиграция и трафик на хора.

За гранични страни, като моята, България, изложени на засилен натиск от имиграционните потоци и активността на международната организирана престъпност, успешното и скорошно въвеждане на новите стандарти ще бъде от ключово значение при опазване на външните граници на Съюза.

Също така, предлаганите изменения дават възможност на държавите-членки да подобрят и ускорят процеса по издаване на визи, което несъмнено ще допринесе за засилване на връзките с третите страни. Така ще се постигне цялостно подобрение на имиджа на Съюза. Разбира се, при прилагането на новото законодателство трябва да се има предвид и възможните икономически последствия за кандидатстващите за визи.

Събирането на допълнителни такси към вече съществуващите може да доведе до създаване на нови бариери пред свободата на придвижване на добросъвестните пътници. Накрая, искам да подчертая, че осигуряването на добра защита при обмен на данните във връзка с издаване на визи за пътуване в Европейския съюз ще бъде от ключово значение.

Парламентът винаги е защитавал личните данни на гражданите на Съюза и считам, че е справедливо и морално да прилагаме същите високи стандарти и при защита на данните на нашите гости.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would just like to thank, once again, Baroness Ludford and all the honourable Members for their contributions and their comments. I shall convey to my colleague Mr Barrot all that they have said today.

  Sarah Ludford, rapporteur. − Madam President, I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs who have worked with me. I have been ‘Mrs VIS’ for over four years and, together with the shadows, we have formed quite a close club and I will miss you all. I will particularly miss you, if I may say so, Madam President, as we may not see each other after June. We have been an all-female club, which has been delightful, but I would also like to thank all the staff involved, who have not all been female. They have been excellent.

I respect the positions of Ms Kaufmann and Ms Ždanoka. I understand their positions and I thank them very much for taking a full part in the negotiations and in the discussions even though, as they pointed out, they cannot support the outcome.

I am very sad that Mr Coelho is not able to support this compromise. I hope he understands how hard I fought for some of the elements that he also wanted. After all they were in my original report. If he thinks I could have achieved more, that might cause some spluttering in the Council and Commission because I think they saw me as quite a tough customer to deal with.

Mr Batten has left the Chamber. I think that was part of the UKIP election campaign. As Mrs Ţicău pointed out, the UK is not party to the Visa Information System as the country is not in Schengen, so the UK has full control of its own borders. I think Mr Batten, as usual, was somewhat muddled in his thinking.

I thank all the other speakers who made constructive contributions. I am glad that we are putting this to bed as I personally feel that I wish to resign from being ‘Mrs VIS’ after this.

  La Présidente. - Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu mercredi.

Déclarations écrites (article 142)

  Alin Lucian Antochi (PSE), în scris. – Introducerea in cadrul VIS a datelor biometrice de identificare reprezinta un pas important in stabilirea unei legaturi sigure intre titularul de viza si pasaport, prevenindu-se astfel fenomenul folosirii falsei identitati.

Cu toate acestea, prezentul regulament a semnalat inca de la prima lectura o serie de neconcordante intre Consiliu si Parlament privind aspecte precum: amprentarea copiilor pana la 6 ani cu riscul de a ignora detalii ce privesc costurile si incovenientele cu care parintii s-ar confrunta odata cu schimbarea amprentelor digitale ale copiilor ; noile provocari referitoare la organizarea colectarii datelor biometrice si nu in ultimul rand lipsa de experienta a Statelor Membre cu privire la gestionarea pastrarii datelor personale si greselile tehnice

In acest context trebuie sa ne asiguram ca Statele Membre aplica reguli uniforme in vederea eliberarii vizelor Schengen, iar Instructiunile Comune Consulare sunt redefinite si adaptate.Mai mult, este nevoie sa acordam o atentie deosebita protejarii datelor biometrice ale celor care le-au furnizat. Trebuie sa fim constienti ca, desi acest sistem de colectare a datelor biometrice este destinat combaterii infractiunilor si terorismului prin accesul si schimbul de informatii intre autoritatilor politienesti ale Statelor Membre, el ar putea fi in egala masura accesat de diferite grupuri de interes, daca masuri ridicate de securitate nu sunt prevazute si luate.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE-DE), în scris. – Regulamentul de modificare a instrucţiunilor consulare comune referitoare la vize defineşte cadrul juridic necesar pentru introducerea identificatorilor biometrici in sistemul de informatii privind vizele (VIS), precum si organizarea primirii si prelucrării cererilor de viza.

Regulamentul creează posibilitatea de cooperare cu un prestator extern de servicii în vederea colectării cererilor de viză.

Consider că motivele pentru care se dă mână liberă cooperării cu prestatori externi sunt nefondate si se creează pericolul traficului de vize. Desi regulamentul stabileşte ca statele membre rămân „operatorul”, iar prestatorii externi de servicii „persoana împuternicită de operator”, cred că protecţia persoanelor fizice în ceea ce priveşte prelucrarea şi circulaţia datelor biometrice este pusă sub semnul întrebării.

Dreptul de a percepe o taxă de serviciu, în afara taxei de viză normală, va crea diferenţe între statele membre în ceea ce priveşte costul unei vize. Sunt absolut convins că acest lucru va crea diferenţe între statele membre si la nivelul numărului de cereri de vize.

Atrag atenţia statelor membre care practică „externalizarea” ca formă de organizare a primirii si prelucrării cererilor de viza să ţină cont de acest pericol si să-si revizuiască cadrul juridic astfel încât să reducă la minim posibilitatea colectării cererilor de viza de către prestatori externi.