Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-09-14-Speech-2-106"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19990914.5.2-106"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I feel that none of us must lose sight of the fact that the European Union is seen as irrelevant and unresponsive to the crises in our world today. The huge problem of confidence in our institutions has been exacerbated by the problems of the Commission in recent months.
The European Union’s response to the Balkans, on our very doorstep, was generally viewed as too little, too late. On East Timor – and I note, Mr Prodi, what you said this morning – where are we? Two weeks after the world is advised of the most brutal genocide following elections in an attempt to establish the very essence of democracy which we, as Parliamentarians, above all should uphold, we are not yet in gear and not seen as relevant to the solution by any commentators.
While Parliament must look at its own role very seriously, especially following the poor turnout in the recent elections in many Member States – evidence at best of disinterest but more likely cynicism and disdain by our citizens – our job today is to respond to the hearing of the Commissioners-elect and to the case put by the President-elect, Mr Prodi.
Yes, Mr Prodi, we need “ambitious reforms of the European Union institutions”. I take that to be your
to match the
which you refer to, but not an everlasting reform, not a constant state of flux. We need stability and we need to get down to the business of policy as quickly as possible.
I support the view of the Commission’s relationship with Parliament being akin to that of a government’s relationship with its parliament. But let us reflect that in most parliaments a vote of no confidence in a single member of the government results in the entire government resigning, not just the individual minister. Is that what we are asking for? We are giving confused signals.
In insisting on the political reflection of the outcome of the recent European Parliament elections within the European Commission, how far should we go in restricting the choice of and dictating to national governments their selection of Commissioner? We must learn from our hearings. We must never allow a government to use the Commission as a retirement home for politicians past – to use a consumer term – their “sell-by date” or for a political pay-off for old pals or indeed to export a national embarrassment to Europe. At the same time there is a need for an important balance between the Commission, Parliament and the rights of governments.
We have no choice, Mr Prodi. It is all or nothing in terms of your new college. On balance I feel we must accept it and support your team. Yes, we have concerns about a few individuals but the responsibility for ensuring that none of them hit the headlines adversely over the next five years is yours, not ours, given the limited scope of the hearings in this Parliament.
The key to the future of a credible Europe lies in a proper relationship between the Commission and Parliament built on mutual respect. I hope you agree with that. I wish you all well."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples