Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-113"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.7.3-113"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the policy on Commission appointments is, without doubt, a key element within the framework of the reform to which President Prodi is committed. It is a key element because this House shares the determination of Mr Kinnock, the Vice-President responsible for reform, to make appointments based not on national quotas, but on merit. At the moment, therefore, while Parliament has still not taken a position on administrative reform – which we are observing with great attention and which we all hope will, this time, truly be a great success – I wish to say that it is appropriate at this stage to watch how the Commission is putting these good intentions, these projects to reform the appointments policy, into practice. Furthermore, I believe that transparency is a good thing, not only in terms of the control which this House has to carry out, but it is also good in itself. We should bear in mind that the appointments policy provides motivation in some cases and not in others. It promotes some officials at the expense of others and this policy may serve as an example, in terms of solving the principal problem faced by the Community structure – I am delighted that President Prodi and Mr Kinnock agree with this analysis – which is the lack of motivation amongst officials. It is therefore very important that we try to see that good intentions are accompanied by good practices.
We all agree on the need to make progress on national quotas, and that appointments should be made on the basis of merit, but this cannot justify certain regional imbalances. At the moment, according to the data available to us, which I am grateful for because the transparency process is a very good thing, most A1 or A2 senior officials are of the same nationality as the Commissioner, way above the German senior officials, for example. There are clear imbalances. To give another example, it cannot be put down to merit that there are 22 A1 or A2 Spaniards and 16 Belgian ones.
It is important that in a procedure which needs to be transparent, merit is easily explicable and comprehensible. Merit cannot explain overall imbalances or imbalances in certain Directorates-General, in some of which there is a clear predominance of officials of a certain nationality.
It is also important that there is success in the search for equality between the sexes. Nobody would say – I certainly would not – that the fact that there are so few A1 or A2 women is due to an assessment of merit. On the contrary, we are surrounded by women who are much more valuable than us, my wife to name but one. I must tell my friends that behind every great woman there is a great man, because everybody knows that my wife is worth much more than I am. I am grateful to the Socialist spokesperson, who knows my wife, for agreeing with me. It is important that we fulfil the commitment to double the number of female appointments. We will closely monitor this appointments policy, which must be open and decisive.
We are happy to accept the new appointments within the Commission, in particular that of the Secretary-General. Many believed that new policies require new faces and, in that context, perhaps the changeover of the Secretary-General should be supported. At least that is what I think.
I would like to conclude by saying that when you come in July to explain the changes you are going to make to the procedures for appointments based on merit, I am sure you will have the agreement and support of all the Groups in this House."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples