Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-277"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.9.2-277"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, early last year, the 1997 discharge was postponed because this Parliament could not possibly grant discharge to a resigning Commission which could not enter into any commitments for the future. In its resolution, this Parliament stated that discharge could not be granted until we had received serious, far-reaching proposals for reform from the new European Commission. This report, therefore, appears at a crucial time, on the eve of Mr Kinnock’s reforms. It is an excellent opportunity for this Parliament to introduce far-reaching reforms to these plans. In the period leading up to this, it already appeared, on the basis of the initial drafts, that the Commission had made very important pledges. We asked for a whistle-blower’s regulation, and this is now in place. Parliament wanted financial inspection and audit functions to be separated. This has now been done. Parliament requires a code of conduct for Commissioners and Cabinets. This is in place too. Parliament asked the Commission to waive its excessive privileges. It did this as well. The Commission has also entered into commitments to cooperate with Parliament in terms of SEM 2000. Fundamental changes will also be considered for the technical assistance offices.
These are sound, first steps which illustrate that, if this Parliament so wishes, changes are not only possible but can also be translated into action quickly. We want more than that, however. The Commission should now produce an ambitious and far-reaching reform programme. This is not only necessary for proper public administration, it is a
of regaining the trust of the European citizen. We now demand from the European Commission clear pledges concerning the following points.
Firstly, Parliament must have complete access to all Commission documents. This, however, presupposes that we set up an internal scheme quickly in order to be able to guarantee the confidentiality of sensitive documents. In the context of providing information, I would like to draw the Commission’s attention to the fact that we are very concerned about the present draft plans on public access to documents. If the current draft is correct, then this is a huge step backwards in comparison to today. We must put an end to the situation in which financially powerful organisations with representation in Brussels are able to access information whilst the ordinary citizen is not. Neither can we tolerate a situation in which a public body holds the copyright to public documents.
We would also like a clear job description for each European official so that an official with conscientious objections can more easily object to tasks which are unethical or unlawful.
Furthermore, it should be the case that, if the Court of Auditors detects a mistake not just one year but two years running, the management should be held responsible for it, and this will have an effect on chances of promotion. Ultimately, we also need to achieve better cooperation, of course, between the European Court of Auditors and its national counterparts.
This Parliament has also asked the Commission to give an initial outline of the external aid policy reforms on 31 March of this year. It should no longer be the case that, although Europe is an economic power, we have no political influence because, when the chips are down, we cannot offer effective aid to areas which desperately need it. I would quote Gaza as an example. It is unacceptable that the Commission completed the construction of a hospital in 1996 and that, as yet, it has been left unused.
Mr President, since 1996, the discharge has acquired a heavy, political significance. It is one of the most powerful weapons Parliament has and must therefore be deployed with care. This is why we will most probably grant the discharge tomorrow. However, we are not surrendering this weapon without placing a time bomb in its place. Indeed, the 1999 discharge will not be given until all financial irregularities highlighted by the Court of Auditors have been cleared up.
Finally, this discharge report is naturally addressed to the Commission. But this does not detract from the fact that the European Parliament should also put its own house in order. As long as we have no status, we are not credible as a force for reforming the Union. The reforms of the European institutions are necessary in order to be able to continue Europe’s development process. We cannot have a decisive and fair Europe unless it is also open and democratic. All institutions must now join forces in order to work together towards building this type of Europe."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples