Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-11-Speech-2-048"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000411.3.2-048"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the key task of this European Parliament is, and remains, that of restoring European citizens’ confidence in the European project. Our most powerful weapon in this regard is the discharge. This is why the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party is in favour of postponing discharge, as suggested, until such time as the Commission has fulfilled our specific condition. In this way, we can keep the pressure on and bring about real reform.
Unfortunately, the Council failed once again this year to follow the good example of Parliament, and discharge for 1998 has been granted as if the matter were quite insignificant. This is particularly regrettable because the national governments are responsible for 80% of European spending and are, as such, responsible for a proportionate share of the irregularities. It is now high time that the Council followed our example and searched its own heart.
There is no doubt that our discharge resolutions are effective. This is borne out by the far-reaching reforms which the Commission has now undertaken. I would like to illustrate this with a recent example. Our pressure has prompted the European Commission to undertake drastic reform in foreign policy. I am keen, therefore, to share with you my initial reaction. The plans for changing the project cycle and transforming the SCR into a European bureau are a positive step forward. But the real political prioritising we need for the purpose of employing our very limited resources is still lacking.
The attention paid to the discharge granted to the European Commission is overwhelming, but I am of the opinion that the discharge granted to the European Parliament deserves just as much, if not more, attention. Within the European Commission, a drastic reform programme has been launched at our insistence. Unfortunately, it has proved impossible so far to take the same drastic steps in this House.
The Kuhne report is Parliament’s first report which takes discharge seriously. Not only did Mr Kuhne manage to identify the sensitive areas where all the key points were concerned, he also managed to set fixed deadlines. This is what Parliament will be judged on and he deserves our true appreciation for this work.
Some claim that the European Parliament should be judged by the same stringent measures as the European Commission. I do not share this view. In my opinion, we should raise the standard for ourselves. We are the controlling body. We have the direct link with the citizen. We are primarily responsible for restoring their confidence in the European project. This is why it is not enough to measure up against the non-elected officials within the Commission. We should outstrip them by far. Unfortunately, nothing is further from the truth.
I would like to emphatically lay the blame for Parliament’s bad image with those who have always had a majority. The two large parties are responsible for the ethos of nepotism and underhand dealing which permeates this House. But the small parties too which have mismanaged the party funding have once again put our name in a bad light.
The Kuhne report will be an important weapon which can be used by those in favour of reform in this House. But whether it will be adopted at this stage remains to be seen. There is in fact a risk that, if we grant discharge to ourselves whilst not having done so for the Commission, we will then take the edge of this report and this is exactly what we do not want to do. We must think very hard about this so that we can actually restore the citizen’s confidence."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples