Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-111"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001114.4.2-111"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
(FR) Last night we examined four draft texts on combating organised crime which, on the whole, are to be welcomed, even if the reports and amendments from the European Parliament are themselves more questionable.
These texts have two points in common. Firstly, they are mutually complementary, extending Europol’s competence, setting up a Provisional Judicial Cooperation Unit, improving reciprocal assistance in judicial matters between Member States and defining more clearly the conditions for the fight against money laundering which is the result, or the cause, or in any case a necessary component in a great many very serious crimes.
Next, these texts are all based on initiatives by Member States, coming under either the third pillar of Article 67 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, where the Commission does not have the monopoly on the right of initiative. Let me point out in passing that seven of the reports presented during this part-session have been in response to national initiatives, proving that where this system is implemented, it is proving to be very productive. Moreover, it is developing forms of cooperation that give greater respect to national sovereignty, as is shown by the initiative of the French Republic dealt with in the Roure report, which manages to reconcile mutual assistance in judicial matters and respect for the key interests of the Member States.
We supported these initiatives in general, except where the European Parliament amendments were tending to introduce too much of a federalist bias. We do, however, deeply regret the fact that a fifth text, the Ceyhun report on the two initiatives by the French Republic seeking to step up controls on illegal immigration was referred back to committee. The arguments put forward by the European Parliament are completely fallacious. The fact is, this House wishes to interfere with everything but draws the line at supporting the decisions which nonetheless lie at the heart of the responsibilities of States in order to protect their own peoples. Fortunately, in this field, the European Parliament still has only a consultative role until the Treaty of Amsterdam is fully implemented, yet it is still finding occasion to abuse this role by putting the brake on reasonable decisions."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Berthu (UEN ),"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples