Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-02-Speech-3-108"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Public access to documents2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010502.7.3-108"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-02-Speech-3-1092
lpv:speaker	lp:Johannes Blokland2
lpv:spokenAs	co-chair; EDD (2001-01-30--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; ECON (2000-02-02--2002-01-14)3 member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we have managed to complete a compromise text on which the Council, Commission and negotiators of Parliament agreed just within the time limit. It is encouraging to see that Parliament is managing to leave its mark on an increasing number of negotiation procedures of this kind. But I am not thrilled with the end result. The procedures are not particularly wonderful. I do not welcome the secret negotiations, as a result of which the small groups and interest groupings have hardly been able to play a role at all. We are now being confronted with a text whose adagio is in fact “like it or lump it”. We are having to ‘like’ a great deal in terms of content, especially the classification of confidential documents represents quite a big step backwards for Parliament. Many phrases are so vague that they could be interpreted in any which way in practice. For example, the claim by the rapporteurs that the national disclosure regulations have been safeguarded springs to mind. If that is the case, why has a section dedicated solely to this subject been deleted from the text of the Regulation? On the other hand, it was too much to expect that a regulation on access to documents, with which only a few Member States were familiar, could be made applicable in its entirety to the whole Union. The southern Member States do not have such regulations, so we cannot blame them for showing signs of cold feet. It is utopian to believe that we will always reach the ideal policy at European level. The range of opinions on the desired transparency is unfortunately too wide for that to happen. At European level too, we increasingly notice that certain limits are reached in the Member States. The most achievable result is then a compromise which, in fact, satisfies nobody. This is a reality which we must accept. In the European Union, we must accept the Member States’ own backgrounds and cultures, even if this does not always suit us."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph