Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-198"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010313.14.2-198"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, one and a half years after the Prodi Commission took office, we still remember its fine-sounding but pompous announcements about zero-tolerance towards fraud and corruption, together with the promises made by the retread Commissioner, Mr Kinnock, to make this Commission the best administration in the world. Unfortunately, even one and a half years on, there is still an alarming gap between the rhetoric and the reality of the Prodi Commission. In view of its failure to catch up on the backlog of old cases and to prevent new cases of fraud, I feel bound to ask the Commission why it is not seizing this opportunity to make a truly fresh start.
Unfortunately, there is no sign of a new wind blowing through the Commission, apart from the hot air emanating from the tonnes of papers on reform generated by Commissioner Kinnock. And those reforms are already in danger of failing because of internal resistance from officials. Real problems in the fight against fraud and corruption, such as the overdue reform of the disciplinary procedure, are not being tackled. The Commission has high-handedly ignored all Parliament's suggestions in this field, and it is giving exactly the same treatment to Parliament's requests for a European Public Prosecutor's Office to be set up and for the independence of OLAF, the European Anti-Fraud Office, to be guaranteed.
Cover-ups, camouflage and deceit should not form the Commission's strategy for the fight against fraud. The Fléchard case, which dates back to the beginning of the 1990s, is an example of how not to do things. The arbitrary and unlawful decision made by the Delors cabinet in January 1994 ultimately led to a situation in which this company was able to play an important role in a fresh fraud scandal concerning traffic in adulterated butter between 1995 and 2000. It has not been possible to clarify or predict the extent and consequences of this scandal either in financial terms or as regards the significant risk to public health. In my view, the way it handles this case is the most important yardstick for the Commission's attempts to improve matters. I say that because this case in no longer just about the significant financial losses that the Community has suffered through fraud, but it is also about the health risk to the public both in Europe and beyond. So swift and consistent action is needed more than ever.
The Commission cannot, as has so often happened, hide behind the need to protect companies' commercial interests. Instead, it should strike a balance between those commercial interests and the protection of public health.
As in all democratic European States, budgetary control is one of the most important rights and duties of the Members of the European Parliament. So the Commission should not resort to artifice to obstruct that control. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear from such control. If on its own authority the Commission withholds documents classified as confidential, or gives them to some Members but not to others, that amounts to a blatant infringement of fundamental constitutional principles such as equal treatment and non-discrimination.
The framework agreement of 5 July 2000, which was worked out with excessive haste, and which is supposed to legitimise such actions on the part of the Commission, needs to be measured against these democratic principles and is bound to fail that test.
I would particularly like to thank Mr Bösch for his report and I look forward to continued fruitful cooperation across party lines in this highly important area."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples