Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-13-Speech-1-052"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001113.5.1-052"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"I want to speak about the Karamanou report on Europol. Everybody who has spoken agrees that it is a very valuable initiative and we support what it says.
However, as many speakers have said, there is not enough democratic control and accountability. That is the main focus of the cross-party amendments which the Committee is putting forward. We want to see parliamentary involvement in the appointments of the director, and by a majority vote because, when we have enlargement to 28 Member States, it will be very difficult to find everybody agreeing on the identity of the director. It has to be by a majority vote – we propose two-thirds – and we also want parliamentary involvement in the dismissal of the director, if ever that becomes necessary, by a two-thirds vote as well.
We want parliamentary involvement in the management board. We could enormously improve democratic accountability and control. And we want the Court to be involved in disputes. These things are in the amendments and, judging by the debate in the committee, I am very hopeful that Parliament will vote for them.
However, I want to look for just a few moments at the future, and at what comes beyond this proposal. I see two signs, one good and one bad. The bad development in the future which many colleagues have spoken about – including my friend, Mr Andrews – is the remorseless growth in organised crime which we are seeing across Europe. The opening of frontiers for the single market was a thoroughly good idea but it has also helped the Mafia, and criminals from Eastern Europe to spread their tentacles across our Union.
When we get enlargement, which is the good aspect of the future that I see, we are going to find it more and more difficult to counter organised crime. The criminals can move freely across frontiers but our police forces cannot. Already today there are about 120 different police forces in the European Union, most of them, I may say, in my own Member State, because in the United Kingdom we have a police force in every single county and they only work up to their county borders. We have far too many police forces already and we are going to have even more once we have completed enlargement, our ability to deal with organised crime is going to be very much less than it should be. What we need is for Europol to be given operational capability across frontiers.
At public meetings, when I talk about the growth in organised crime, the response invariably from the public is, “Well, what are you doing about it? Get on with it. Take the necessary powers. Organise the police forces so we can deal with the growth in crime.” The public is in favour and – as very often happens – is ahead of us and the Council of Ministers.
I should very much like to hear the Commissioner’s reaction to the idea that when we hopefully get the concept of enhanced cooperation accepted at the Nice Summit next month that we create a European FBI. We do not have to call it a European FBI, but that is the logical next step. It would have full public support and it is necessary for the future."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples