Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-14-Speech-3-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010314.1.3-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I should like to congratulate the Swedish Presidency on a good home page. It is splendid to be able to see agendas for meetings in the various working parties. May we also be given the names of the participants and access to the documents and minutes from the meetings? I would also congratulate the presidency on the Futurum home page initiative. Why, however, must it start with interventions from the top, from Mr Persson, Mr Verhofstadt, Mr Prodi and Mr Barnier? Why are there not also interventions from people who are opposed to the Treaty of Nice and the centralisation of more administrative power in Brussels? How can a Swedish President-in-Office issue invitations to a debate at the European School in Brussels without having a single critical voice on the panel? According to Eurobarometer, only 18% of EU citizens prefer decisions to be made in Brussels. 63% prefer them to be made at local, regional or national levels. Why do the 18% all have places on the panel in the first debate about our future, while the 63% are not represented at all?
The critics of the EU in my group and in the intergroup, SOS Democracy, are prepared to engage in debate both at the European School and in community centres. We should like to explain why we wish to see an open, democratic and slimmed-down EU in which decisions are taken close to the people they affect, an EU which addresses far fewer cross-border issues, but then whose work is free from bureaucracy, waste and fraud. In future, initiatives for devising common rules should be taken by the national parliaments and not by the Commission or Parliament. Why not create a sort of council of the parliaments that could meet a couple of times a year and agree upon the work programme and the legal basis for projected bills? It is the legal basis which, of course, decides whether it is to be a case of voluntary coordination or binding rules. In that way, it will be elected representatives from the Member States who decide in each case whether decision making is to be transferred to the EU from the electorate and elected representatives in the Member States. In that way, democracy will at least have a chance in relation to the present system of legislation by officials to which we have become accustomed, even if all fifteen Member States profess to be democracies. We are, of course, in the absurd situation in which, if it were one of the candidate countries which adopted laws in the same way as we do, we should have to turn down the country concerned for not being democratic."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples