Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-19-Speech-3-083"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000119.4.3-083"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, the Theato report on the protection of the Union’s financial interests has undergone an interesting change between its first and final versions. The proposal for a Community regulation establishing an independent European Public Prosecutor’s Office has been dropped because it is clearly contrary to Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It has now become a simple request to the next Intergovernmental Conference. Its replacement is a proposal for a regulation creating a rather bizarre independent European agency with powers to monitor the legality of the investigative activities of OLAF, the Anti-Fraud Office.
This second proposal echoes my intervention of 25 October in which I expressed concern, like other Members, about the conditions of application in this House of the interinstitutional agreement on OLAF investigations. Perhaps an attempt is being made to take our criticisms into account, even though it is rather late in the day. Unfortunately, this new independent agency which would encompass an independent office seems rather strange. It still does not respond to the basic question which I raised about the autonomy of this House.
The proposal for an independent European Public Prosecutor’s Office is contrary to our vision of a Europe of nations, as I explained in yesterday’s debate and in the debate on 13 September on the second report of the Committee of Independent Experts. However, it is still being advanced by a whole load of legal experts who are supposedly intellectually independent but who are, in reality, more often than not, paid directly or indirectly by the Commission. They would do better to look at the privileges and immunities of the Commission which, according to the very same Independent Experts’ report, are hindering the fight against fraud.
It is also extraordinary that the idea for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should appear in the Theato report without any consultation of our Committee on Constitutional Affairs, when such an innovation would profoundly change the balance between the institutions. However, as usual in European affairs, reforms are being instigated without a proper explanation from the start of the extent of their implications. This is part of the disinformation by which the system continues to advance."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples