Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-310"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.10.2-310"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to extend a warm thank you to the rapporteur for his report. I am pleased that I can address him now in Dutch, now that Mr Van den Berg has just done so. Otherwise I probably would have felt slightly guilty about this. I would like to say that this report represents a huge improvement, also with its amendments. I am from the Social Committee and rapporteurs on our committee are always proud to receive 100 amendments because then they know that they have tabled an interesting topic. I think that this is also the case here, but I think it would be a bit over the top to spend too much time talking about these 100 amendments. I would also point out that our coordinator on the Budgetary Control Committee is Mr Pomés Ruiz, who is Spanish and has hence made a major contribution to this debate from a Spanish perspective.
Mr President, one of the key aspects which have been mentioned is, to my mind, the rapporteur’s proposal for the standing committee on standards in public administration. A very important proposal indeed. I am only very surprised that the Socialist group would like to subordinate this proposal to one tabled by Mrs Morgan, because she wants to scrap it altogether. I cannot fully grasp the underlying rationale. On the one hand, we receive all kinds of words of praise for the rapporteur but, at the same time, Mrs Morgan wants to pursue a sort of scorched earth policy on this point and on other key points as well, as a result of which, in fact, the entire content of this report vanishes. I do not know whether this is to appease Mr Kinnock, but I happen to know Mr Kinnock. He is happy to hear what our demands are and is quite prepared to be flexible if he considers it necessary. In my opinion, such a far-reaching scorched earth policy is really unnecessary.
Finally, the issue of officials. Actually, I do not entirely share Mr Haarder’s view. I do agree that the section on officials has, in fact, been completed totally inadequately. First of all, the importance of a public service in general is not at all emphasised. Secondly, all kinds of proposals are nevertheless being mooted, and we have to ask ourselves whether these are terribly appropriate and whether they would lead to improvement. For example, we are currently looking into TAOs. This is a key point but, at the same time, we want to abolish temporary staff at the Commission. These two considerations are diametrically opposed to each other, and I really fail to grasp how such a proposal can end up on the table."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples