Lena Düpont
Member of the European Parliament · PPE · DE
“So let us act on that: strengthening law enforcement, both at EU level and at national level; deliver a strong mandate – echo what Tomas has said – on Europol; increase and ease the access to information, the exchange of that information for our security agencies, both at EU and national level; and improve the coordination between all rel…”
“There is a trend for more violence, more exploitation; the unholy combination of organised crime, radicalised and even terrorist groups and third‑country interests being played out in the European Union. So that's a problem, and I am happy to hear that we agree already on some parts of the solution.”
“(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 3-0351-0000 Lukas Sieper (Renew), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielen Dank, Frau Kollegin. Sie haben über viele wichtige Sachen gesprochen. Ich kann mich Ihnen nur anschließen. Ich sehe auch die politische Ebene.”
“And I think as frustrating and as disastrous as it is, we need to further strengthen the physical protection for Jewish sites and synagogues. We need to strengthen our fight against those intolerable acts by fostering the information exchange between law enforcement and intelligence on these terrorist threats, because it is nothing less t…”
“For that, we need a clear mixture of short, mid and long-term instruments – instruments that we need to strengthen because they are already there and new ones where we need to deploy the possibilities. Digital literacy and prevention, including all relevant actors, is important.”
“Madam President, Commissioner, cyberbullying is a silent monster. It cuts social bonds, it undermines human interaction, it erodes trust in society, and it can ultimately – and we just heard the reminder of Coco's example here – put the lives of children at risk.”
The complete record
Every one of 57 lines we hold for Lena Düpont, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“So let us act on that: strengthening law enforcement, both at EU level and at national level; deliver a strong mandate – echo what Tomas has said – on Europol; increase and ease the access to information, the exchange of that information for our security agencies, both at EU and national level; and improve the coordination between all relevant services that are there to protect children – law enforcement, the judiciary, the social services and health and education, and, of course, really beefing up the implementation of the DSA, also in relation to child exploitation here. 3-0455-0000”
“There is a trend for more violence, more exploitation; the unholy combination of organised crime, radicalised and even terrorist groups and third‑country interests being played out in the European Union. So that's a problem, and I am happy to hear that we agree already on some parts of the solution.”
“Sie haben richtigerweise darauf hingewiesen, dass es an vielen Stellen ein sehr klares Bekenntnis für keine Zusammenarbeit mit der AfD gibt. Aber Sie haben auch gerade richtigerweise die Kollegin gehört: Es gibt nicht nur den rechtsextremistischen Antisemitismus. Es gibt sehr wohl – und mit sehr steigendem Maße zunehmend gewaltbereiter – auch den linksextremistischen. Wenn es um den Kampf gegen Antisemitismus geht, dürfen uns politische Erwägungen dabei nicht aufhalten. 3-0353-0000”
“(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 3-0351-0000 Lukas Sieper (Renew), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielen Dank, Frau Kollegin. Sie haben über viele wichtige Sachen gesprochen. Ich kann mich Ihnen nur anschließen. Ich sehe auch die politische Ebene. Wir haben ja eine Partei hier im Europäischen Parlament, die in Deutschland sehr eng verwoben ist mit antisemitischen Strömungen, Organisationen, Strukturen. Würden Sie mir zustimmen, dass man mit einer solchen Partei in keinster Weise – auch nicht auf kommunaler Ebene – politisch zusammenarbeiten sollte? Ich meine die AfD in dem Fall. Ich glaube, die CDU arbeitet bisher nicht mit der Linken zusammen. 3-0352-0000 Lena Düpont (PPE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Danke, lieber Kollege, für die Frage.”
“And I think as frustrating and as disastrous as it is, we need to further strengthen the physical protection for Jewish sites and synagogues. We need to strengthen our fight against those intolerable acts by fostering the information exchange between law enforcement and intelligence on these terrorist threats, because it is nothing less than that. By strengthening our security and law enforcement tools to react to that, and by monitoring and acting against online radicalisation, as it was rightfully mentioned, by tackling the online recruitment of attackers, including those when it's about minors doing so. Acknowledging that this is not only about antisemitism, it's not only about jihadist terror, but it is part of a hybrid attack on all of us. Again, Jewish security and safety is our security and safety.”
“Madam President, Commissioner, the latest Europol assessment and reports, including the mentioned Joint Action Day and the results of that backed by the findings of our Fundamental Rights Agency, state again a worrying and an unacceptable reality. Since the horrific attacks of 7 October, antisemitic offences, hate speech and online and offline harassment have significantly surged. Physical attacks against monuments, against synagogues and assaults on people reached an unprecedented height. New and old networks and groups threaten not only Jewish life and culture, but by doing so, individuals and society, all of us. Jewish security and safety is our security and safety. So the colleague rightfully asked, what can we do?”
“For that, we need a clear mixture of short, mid and long-term instruments – instruments that we need to strengthen because they are already there and new ones where we need to deploy the possibilities. Digital literacy and prevention, including all relevant actors, is important. Further support helplines and easing their usage across the EU is also very important, but we also need to assess the possibilities of streamlining the EU's and Member States' approaches, foster a common understanding and definition and, if needed, streamline criminal law. Ultimately, we need to strengthen law enforcement's capacity and possibility to react. And a plea to ourselves: let us not simply accept that there are legal gaps and put them forward as normal. Let's act on it. 3-0301-0000”
“Madam President, Commissioner, cyberbullying is a silent monster. It cuts social bonds, it undermines human interaction, it erodes trust in society, and it can ultimately – and we just heard the reminder of Coco's example here – put the lives of children at risk. Contrary to their public humiliation in group chats, in social media forums and gaming channels, effectively in real life, victims far too often suffer in silence. Because they feel not seen, they feel not taken seriously, that their interests and their vulnerability do not matter. For years now, reports and warnings have been skyrocketing. By now, one in six children between the age of 11 and 15 in Europe alone states that they have been victim to cyberbullying. It is high time to end that.”
“We will address everything that is up to the point in the CSAM regulation, which is ongoing with the Council and the Commission, but for tomorrow, we need to vote on the application so that we meet the deadline on 3 April, because if not, we fail to prevent a huge legal gap in the protection of children online. 1-0041-0000”
“Madam President, I think we really need to urgently have a division here between two things. Tomorrow's vote would have been a very easy one – just on a simple date, on the prolongation of the application of the interim regulation. Because it is about protecting children when they're online. And reports on children's sexual abuse online have multiplied by twenty in the last ten years – so from 1 million reports to 20 million reports. So what we are going to vote on tomorrow is the simple technical prolongation – just another date for what we had agreed on. And what the Greens had actually tried here, together with the support of some here in the House, is to turn the interim regulation into shadow negotiations on the CSAM proposal as such.”
“So, let us be clear: a drop in reports does not mean a drop in abuse. It means fewer victims are identified and fewer perpetrators are stopped. At the same time, the digital landscape is evolving rapidly. Generative AI now enables the creation of abusive material that has never existed before. That makes detection even more urgent, not less. So, working on the current rules, based on the compromise expressed by EPP, S&D and Renew, is therefore not a technical detail – it's the difference between proactive protection and turning a blind eye. We had always been clear: protecting children must come before protecting perpetrators, and this is why we urge this House, but also the Council, to really rapidly conclude the trilogues and work with ambition on the standing framework for child sexual abuse material and the fight against it.”
“Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, today this House has in principle taken an important and necessary decision, because when it comes to the protection of children online, uncertainty is not neutrality; it is a risk. The temporary derogation was always meant to ensure that companies can continue detecting and reporting online sexual abuse while we negotiate the permanent child sexual abuse regulation. Without this legal certainty, companies face a real dilemma: act to protect children, face legal uncertainty or stop detecting abuse altogether. And we have seen what happens when this decision needs to be taken. In 2020, when companies were unsure whether detection was permitted under EU law, reports of abuse from EU-based accounts – and I emphasise that – dropped by 48 % just in a few weeks.”
“To the contrary. But precisely because of that, migration management and the European Union cannot function if major structural decisions are taken in isolation. Rushing through regularisation cannot be a scapegoat for the lack of capacities or the efforts to follow procedures. And lastly, because the move runs against one core principle that we have always been fighting for: access to regularisation is the reward for integration efforts, not the other way round. 2-0492-0000”
“Mr President, many colleagues had said it before: the recent decision by the Spanish Government raises concerns, as clearly can be seen here in plenary. Why is that so? Because the move is somewhat surprising to Member States in the European Union. While, legally speaking, Member States have the right to do so, unilateral measures at such scale should deserve careful scrutiny and consideration and coordination. This move was neither coordinated nor announced before entering into force. Using the emergency procedure without Parliament's reading on top of that adds to the quirky picture of rushing through a decision without taking care of the repercussions. Because the timing could have been better. With the run up to the pact implementation deadline, no one disputes that the Spanish asylum system is under significant pressure.”
“Now we all need to do our homework: we here in Parliament delivering on returns, the STC and SCO with the proposals at hand, but also the Member States with going on with the implementation of the pact and working on the outstanding issues like Eurodac, the infrastructure and so on and so forth. 1-0071-0000”
“The interests of front‑line Member States, the interests of secondary‑movement Member States can be true at the same time. Taking into consideration Member States' positions is not questioning solidarity, it is not giving Member States leeway: it is making sure that things work. And if for that constant work with the Member States, acknowledging their unique positions, trying to bring everyone to the table, is needed, well, we do it. Because we do not give in to populism: we roll up our sleeves and work. At the same time, the second part of the proposal is important as well. Foresight and preparedness will further strengthen our common approach.”
“Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, it was always clear that the path to the implementation will not be an easy one: too large, the challenges comprehensive, our answer. Conclusion of the agreement was always only the first step. The ongoing implementation in the Member States is the next one, and the solidarity pool we now have at our hands. The more concrete it gets, of course, the more we need to live up to our responsibilities. Knowing how sensitive it is for Member States, I thank the Commission that they took the necessary time in order to come to an agreement with the Member States, although, of course, we are always in favour of respecting timelines. The paper is one thing, but making the system work in reality is another. And guess what?”
“Wir haben so wunderbare Beispiele in dem Bereich wie jüngst das Jubiläum der deutsch-französischen Einsatzeinheit, die gemeinsamen Zentren in Kehl, die Fabienne Keller erwähnt hat. Das heißt, wir müssen uns darauf fokussieren, für sie praktische Hürden abzubauen, gemeinsame Übungen veranstalten zu können, Sprachkurse zu finanzieren, und vor allen Dingen anerkennen, was für einen hervorragenden Beitrag sie für unsere europäische Sicherheitsarchitektur leisten. Wir erwarten von Polizistinnen und Polizisten, dass sie uns, unsere Gesellschaft, unsere Demokratie schützen. Tun wir das gleiche für sie. (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.) 2-0104-0000 Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew), blue-card question. – Thank you, colleague Düpont, for taking this blue card.”
“Es sind unsere Polizistinnen und Polizisten aus allen Mitgliedstaaten und in allen Mitgliedstaaten, die tagtäglich für Sicherheit und Ordnung sorgen. Und deswegen ein herzliches Dankeschön von hier aus. Gleichzeitig ändert sich die Lage dynamisch und teilweise dramatisch. Innere und äußere Sicherheit sind untrennbar miteinander verbunden. Organisierte Kriminalität, terroristische Gruppierungen, Drittstaatsakteure fordern uns heraus wie lange nicht. Wir brauchen Europas Sicherheitsarchitektur nicht neu erfinden. Wir müssen das stärken, was wir bereits haben. Das gilt für Frontex und Europol, das gilt für den Informationsaustausch. Und weil vieles heute auch vom Kommissar schon gesagt worden ist – richtigerweise gesagt worden ist –, lassen Sie mich einen Blick verstärkt auf die grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit legen.”
“Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Manchmal hilft ein Blick auf das, was wir bereits erreicht haben. Der Raum der Sicherheit, der Freiheit und des Rechts – die Idee von Tampere 1999 – wird heute mit Leben gefüllt – mit Europols täglichem Kampf gegen Kriminalität, wie jüngst in Lettland zusammen mit Österreich und Estland im Bereich Cybercrime. Frontex-Beamte, die jeden Tag an der Außengrenze stehen und gemeinsam mit den Mitgliedstaaten gemeinsam gegen organisierte Kriminalität, gegen Drogenhandel, Waffenschmuggel, Zigarettenschmuggel, Menschenhandel vorgehen. Allein diese ausgewählten Beispiele machen deutlich: Polizeiliche europäische Zusammenarbeit ist ein entscheidender Baustein unserer europäischen Sicherheitsarchitektur.”
“Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Dieses Mal Drohnen, letztes Mal Kabel, davor waren es über Nacht verschobene Grenzbojen – das russische playbook ist immer das gleiche. Für jedes Land der EU ist etwas dabei, für jeden Teil der Gesellschaft eine Botschaft. Das Ziel: Unruhe, Sorge, Untergraben unserer Resilienz, Spaltung schaffen. Uns muss deswegen klar sein: Angst ist immer ein Indikator für das, was uns wichtig ist, aber sie ist niemals ein guter Ratgeber. Deswegen: Schultern gerade machen, put the money where the mouth is, endlich Verteidigung, Krisenvorsorge und innere Sicherheit konsequent zusammendenken, Verfahren straffen, Beschleunigung vereinfachen, Informationsaustausch und Kooperation zwischen den Sicherheitsbehörden verstärken, unsere Bevölkerung mitnehmen. Ich sage gleichzeitig aber auch: die Mitgliedstaaten mitnehmen.”
“At the same time, let me underline one point – what the tool is not: it is not an individual asset by Member States showing their discontent with partners of ours. So proposing to use it against Israel is not only outrageous, but it will have serious repercussions for Israel and Europe's security. 1-0146-0000”
“The systemic deficiencies in document security, security risks related to citizenship-by-investment schemes, the lack of alignment of third country visa policies and the deterioration of external relations, including hostile acts, are undermining EU security and underline that, in that sense. These grounds take stock of a dynamically changing geopolitical context, and they give us a clever tool at Europe's hands. They turn the visa suspension mechanism into a small but – if used wisely – very effective tool with tremendous effects on our security. Some of the grounds of suspension have been there before, so I really call on the Member States to now actively use them to strengthen our security.”
“Since we have seen that in the past within the European Union, we as Europe also need to be clear on that side: we are open, we are engaging, we look forward to cooperating, but we will not turn a blind eye to actions that undermine mutual partnerships, are directed against the European Union or threaten our – the Member States – or citizens' security. That is why we, as the EPP, have always been fighting for the revision of the visa suspension mechanism for quite a while, and we welcome the solution that has been found. Concretely, we welcome the new grounds for suspension, namely irregular migration, security risks and – most important of all in these times – hybrid threats, including the instrumentalisation of migration.”
“Madam President, dear Commissioner, in a world of free movement, of close trade ties, of prosperous exchanges between countries, visa regimes – or, even more so, visa-free travel regimes – are an important tool for a better, closer, connected world. They are important for international policies; they complement our toolbox in third country cooperation. They are based – and they should be – on good faith. They should rely on mutual recognition, on the overall willingness to work on a shared policy. What are they not? They are not an allowance to turn yourself against your partners, to misuse trust, to exploit visa-free regimes for malicious actions.”
“And we can and we should do whatever we can to stand aside Poland and really defend not our democracies but as well the European Union and each and every Member State of that European Union, because we are in it together and we will face it together. 3-0433-0000”
“Madam President, Commissioner, dear Minister, we also created that committee to protect ourselves and to better prepare ourselves for hybrid threats. But what actually makes hybrid threats so successful? They usually go into the grey zones of society. They go into discussions and values that we actually need to balance, where we need to find not an easy balance between them. They tackle and address unclear competences. They address the lack of protocols, especially the lack of emergency protocols. And, of course, they are running on the lack of attribution. So as a day like today, where we have seen an attack on Poland and immediately a disinformation campaign starting next to it, let me be loud and clear here: that wasn't an accident, that was deliberate.”
“So we focus now on the missing pieces to the pack, which is the return policy, which is the safe third country concept and the safe country of origins. And we will continue with that, with a strengthened Europol, with a strengthened Frontex, and a stronger answer when it comes to a sanctions regime on organised crime and smuggling business. 3-0222-0000”
“We added an efficient procedure with the border procedure, and we added the Eurodac in order to prevent double and triple applications. We are also taking stock of the geopolitical situation because it had changed in the meantime. So we added something on instrumentalisation in order to defend the Member States that were faced with that, and we are still doing that. Are we done yet? No, we are not. We see that the numbers are going down, but there are still deficiencies in the system. There are still loopholes that can be exploited. And make no mistake, this system is exploited by criminal gangs, by networks, by smugglers, and, of course, also by third-country actors. We should not let that out of mind.”
“Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, what have we found last term? We found Member States that were not able to conclude on a common asylum and migration policy. We found a Parliament that had led heavy discussions, intense debate, in order to find a way forward. What have we done? We are taking stock of the common asylum and migration policy, what was left of it from the previous term before that. And we are taking that stock critically because we saw the Dublin transferees, for example, were and are still dysfunctional. But why so? Because they were not connected to solidarity. Because we did not find the right balance between frontline Member States and Member States of secondary movement. We added safeguards against secondary movement.”
“Local, regional and European measures for preparedness and prevention – especially if there is European money connected to that – need to go hand in hand. The division of competences and the territorial organisation of Member States can never – and I repeat, can never – be an excuse to not protect the people. It's the central task of any government to do so. European foresight is key, so you need to improve the information exchange there. But it will only help if the information we provide is taken into consideration on strategic and on operational levels. And lastly, we need to protect our first responders, our firefighters, better than we are able to do now. It concerns their health, it concerns their working conditions, the statutes and so on and so forth. So this is European solidarity in action.”
“Mr President, before the summer recess, we already had a debate and the outlook was gloomy even then. The reality now is that we have faced a devastating wildfire season, and the scale and intensity were as bad as expected. So let me, first of all, thank all the firemen and women that have done the almost impossible, that have been fighting day and night against the odds. We – the European Union, the people of the European Union – owe you for that. Nevertheless, a few messages cannot be repeated and stressed enough. This is indeed European solidarity in action, so we need to make it easier. We need to scale up on readiness and deployability. We need to scale down on administrative procedures and ease the financing. We need to enlarge the pool of experts and the equipment. Everyone has a role to play.”
“This is not only a worrying trend here, it is a call to action by all of us here in the House, in Spain and in the Commission. 3-0286-0000”
“In fact, they are targeted because they are doing their job, further undermining the fight against corruption by not only not being on the forefront of investigation and prosecution, but being in the midst of numerous scandals involving the highest level of allegations themselves. Selling amnesty as a political tool, putting independent judges and prosecutors under pressure, undermining checks and balances further by draft laws on the judiciary, sparking not only protests by judges and prosecutors associations, but treating their rightful criticism in a way that actually five out of seven associations call now for a strike. Above all, instead of being at the forefront of accountability, the government now faces thousands on the streets demanding exactly that accountability, while the government decides to attack opposition leaders.”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, the rule of law is based, among other things, on the integrity of democratic processes, on the fight against corruption, on proper checks and balances and accountability in decision-making processes. So where are we? We have 154 so-called 'royal decrees' being pushed through the parliament. We have reports about warning signs of a growing irrelevance of the parliament. We have smear campaigns against Guardia Civil officers investigating corruption, which means they do not only have the backing of the government for that important job.”
“How on earth shall that help delivering for your citizens, shall that constitute a sovereignty act? The reality is that the government is responsible for their action and their inaction, which is the most fundamental principle of the rule of law: accountability to your citizens. 3-0253-0000”
“The Hungarian Government is in the midst of the debate because for years now they have been undermining the integrity of the political system, undermining the independence of the judiciary, clamping down on citizens' rights, threatening journalists and opposition leaders. They are caught in the midst of various corruption scandals at the highest level. So why frame the debate like today? Why focus on underwear and lacquered leather? Because it is meant to hide the blatant lack of respect for the rule of law, for the government's incapability to solve real problems on the ground, for not being able to deliver on behalf of their citizens. The economy is weak; inflation is still high; businesses experience numerous obstacles. And in the need for money, the Hungarian Government reaches out to China and Russia.”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, the rule of law in itself is neutral. It is a collection of procedural rules to guarantee that a political system is fair, is free, is democratic, that encourages engagement and debates, that fosters cooperation instead of sowing divisions, so that societies can thrive, that businesses can grow, that a country can prosper. Today, as usual, we hear colleagues saying they are fighting for their citizens. They are fighting against the Brussels elites. They are fighting for sovereignty. But let's remind everyone: the Hungarian Government is not in the midst of that debate because they want to protect children.”
“And altogether, let's do what is needed to serve the European Union, our citizens, our way of life. This is no time to shy away. This is no time to close our eyes, on with courage and determination. 2-0285-0000”
“It's an illustration of a security governance that is fit for purpose and time, including information and intelligence gathering and sharing, feeding into a clear situational picture, innovative and thriving capabilities and businesses, agencies that are strong and well coordinated, from border protection to critical infrastructure, to cyber, to law enforcement and to the judiciary side, the fight against organised crime, radicalisation and terroristic threats. The tasks are numerous. So to the Member States, let's be ambitious. That requires strength, that requires courage, and it needs to match the stakes. The most important promise that we can give to our citizens is their safety. To the Parliament, we need to adapt and arrive into the new security landscape, on content and on procedures.”
“Mr President, Commissioner, when we look at the area of freedom, security and justice from 1999, we've come a long way. We have overcome hurdles administratively, but most importantly, sometimes mentally. We increased cross-border cooperation. We built the agencies. We beefed them up on mandates, on staff and resources, on the tasks. We aligned important policies in order to have full leverage on the to the outside world. But somehow during the process, we but more prominently the Member States, lost ambition, while criminals, like threats, like malicious actors, did not. Cynically enough, time has come to once again step up on security. So the strategy of today is more than a strategy. It's a promise to keep Europe safe.”
“And in that sense, I am looking forward to another quick delivery on the closely linked defence white paper, the internal security strategy and the preparedness strategy. 3-0212-0000”
“Still, the proposal is only the start and the EPP stands ready, of course, to work constructively and in a good spirit in the upcoming negotiations. Looking ahead, we also welcome the Commission's announcement to follow up swiftly with the safe third country concept – another crucial part of the pact. But yet again, the world does not stop changing. We will need to further follow developments on the eastern border of the Union, not only as regards instrumentalisation, but also in the broader security context. So, looking ahead, there is an urgent need for a broad understanding of security, ranging from defence, to internal security and preparedness. So citing the Niinistö report, our security landscape requires a whole-of-government, whole-of-society, all-scenario approach.”
“Mr President, Madam Vice-President, just yesterday, Commissioner Brunner presented the new proposal on returns. It is not only a welcome proposal, it is a missing piece to the pact and it's signalling to our citizens that we do hear and see their concerns. But it also proves that the Commission is delivering on key aspects, in time. Mutual recognition, harmonised procedures, new balances of rights and obligations for third-country nationals, tools and means to address security cases and suspected criminals, stronger measures to prevent absconding, and a way forward for enhanced third-country cooperation: these elements will not only strengthen our ability to increase the number of returns, it will put the common asylum and migration system back on its feet.”
“Und ein letzter Satz: Ich freue mich, dass meine Vorrednerin gerade deutlich gemacht hat, dass Sie nicht Teil der Gespräche sein werden. 2-0301-0000”
“This is why I very much welcome today's proposal as finally closing the gap, as presenting the missing piece to the pact. It clearly paves the way forward. Mutual recognition and possibilities for common enforcement, obligation to cooperate for returnees and consequences for non-compliance, rules to prevent absconding, stricter rules on security cases, enhanced third-country cooperation: that will equip the Member States with a real tool to coordinate, to cooperate and to increase the numbers of effective and sustainable returns. With that, we will not only react to our citizens' expectations, we will restore trust in a Union that can uphold the values, and act firmly and effectively, if needed. Colleagues, challenges at this scale need to be met by the democratic forces. We as the EPP stand ready.”
“Madam President, Commissioner, those who don't have a right to stay in the EU should not be in the EU: a simple, self-explanatory sentence. Yet only one in five third-country nationals where the return order applies is effectively returned. This stretches Member States' capacity. It undermines the promise of international protection for those who are in real need of protection. It can have devastating security consequences. Long procedures, shifting responsibilities between authorities, lack of coordination between Member States, lack of cooperation by the returnees and lack of cooperation with third countries are the core deficiencies. Yet an effective returns policy is an integral part of a fully functioning common asylum and migration system.”
“Und deswegen schließe ich vielleicht mit der, neben der Priorisierung von Haushaltsmitteln, wichtigsten Forderung von Niinistö: Sicherheitsvorbehalte und Auswirkungsüberprüfung in allen Gesetzgebungsverfahren, die wir hier im Haus haben. 4-0135-0000”
“Der Niinistö-Bericht zur Preparedness Union schreibt uns nicht ohne Grund viele Dinge ins Stammbuch, unter anderem auch den beschleunigten Roll-out eines sicheren, autonomen, interoperablen Systems für Kommunikation und Informationsaustausch; die Beschleunigung und den Ausbau des European Critical Communication System auf der zivilen und der militärischen Seite; die Abhängigkeiten in Lieferketten zu vermeiden; Forschung, Entwicklung, Produktion sicherheitsrelevanter Produkte in Europa; Komponenten und Dienstleistungen so attraktiv zu machen, dass wir sie nutzen können. Preparedness, liebe Kollegen, braucht einen umfassenden Ansatz, der aus den üblichen Silos auch ein Stück weit rausgeht. Deswegen werden ITRE, SEDE, LIBE, IMCO, TRAN, INTA, SANT – wir alle werden unseren Beitrag leisten müssen.”
“Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar! Kommunikation ist nicht nur ein zutiefst menschliches Bedürfnis mit gesellschaftlicher Wirkung. Kommunikationsfähigkeit in Krisenzeiten ist wesentlich für die Aufrechterhaltung staatlicher und gesellschaftlicher Ordnung. Dafür braucht es verlässliche Strukturen und Mittel. Das gilt im Kontext nationaler Sicherheit ebenso wie im europäischen. Informations- und Kommunikationsflüsse gewährleisten zu können, Lagebilder herzustellen und Führungsfähigkeit bereitstellen zu können, hat entscheidenden Einfluss auf den Verlauf unterschiedlicher Szenarien und auf unsere Fähigkeit, sie zu bewältigen.”