Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-04-Speech-3-268"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010704.7.3-268"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"As they deal with the same subject, Questions Nos 1 to 10 will be taken together.
Question No 3 by Gorka Knörr Borrás ():
It is expected that during the Belgian presidency the Laeken Declaration on the future of the EU will be adopted. A number of Member States, including Germany, Austria, Belgium and the UK, have established mechanisms for the participation of their regional or federal bodies in Council proceedings. Given that the autonomous regions of the Spanish state, the German and Austrian Länder and the Belgian regions possess significant powers of their own which are in many cases affected by Community decisions, does the Council support the view that the regions could be directly represented within itself?
Question No 4 by Bart Staes ():
With the declaration to be made at Laeken on Saturday, 15 December, the federal state of Belgium intends to make its contribution to the debate on the future of the European Union. In that respect, the positive stance adopted by Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt on the joint political declaration by seven constitutional regions is particularly pleasing. At the end of May, he received the regional president of Catalonia, the minister-president of Salzburg, the first minister of Scotland, the chief ministers of Flanders and Wallonia and the ministers for European/federal affairs of Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia, who are pressing for the role of constitutionally recognised regions in the European Union to be strengthened.
Does the Council support greater Treaty-based involvement for constitutional regions in the European project in view of the added democratic legitimacy they bring to the construction of the European Union? If not, why is it opposed to the greater Treaty-based involvement of constitutional regions in mapping out the future of Europe?
Question No 5 by Neil MacCormick ():
Annex IV of the Nice Treaty contains a declaration calling for a deeper and wider debate about the future development of the EU. The IGC also recognised the need to improve and to monitor the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union and its Institutions. This formula opens the possibility of a form of convention with representatives of national parliaments, the European Parliament and the governments of the Member States. Contrary to the principle of subsidiarity no reference was made to the constitutional regions.
Question No 1 by Nelly Maes ():
Will the Council – following the democratic principle of subsidiarity – involve all the parliaments of the constitutional regions when it chooses a form of convention?
Question No 6 by Jillian Evans ():
According to the Declaration in Annex IV of the Nice Treaty the debate about the future development of the EU should address, inter alia, the following question: How to establish and monitor a more precise delimitation of competences between the EU and the Member States, reflecting the principle of subsidiarity? The present idea of subsidiarity in the EC Treaty is commonly interpreted as regulating only relations between Union and states. This interpretation has to be broadened as outlined in the resolution of the European Parliament of 26 October 2000 on better lawmaking.
Will the Laeken Declaration propose to amend the Treaties so that they specifically include recognition of, and respect for, the political and legislative powers of the Member States’ internal political units in their executive, legislative and judicial relations with the EU Institutions?
Question No 7 by Eurig Wyn ():
Annex IV of the Nice Treaty contains a declaration calling for a deeper and wider debate about the future development of the EU. It also recognises the need to improve and to monitor the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union and its Institutions. In December 2001 the Belgian presidency will be concluded by a contribution to this debate, the Laeken Declaration.
Will the Laeken Declaration recognise that a further democratisation of the European decision-making process calls for a more radical reform, with legislative power vested in two chambers, the European Parliament and a reformed Council that would subsume some aspects of the present Committee of the Regions and would strongly enhance the role of the constitutional regions?
Question No 8 by Carlos Bautista Ojeda ():
Annex IV of the Nice Treaty contains a declaration that calls for a deeper and wider debate about the future development of the EU. Following a report to its Gothenburg meeting in June 2001, the European Council at its meeting in Laeken in December 2001 will agree on appropriate initiatives for the continuation of this process. According to the Declaration the process should address, inter alia, the following question: How to establish and monitor a more precise delimitation of competences between the EU and the Member States, reflecting the principle of subsidiarity?
Will the Council – following the principle of subsidiarity – refrain from infringing the competences of the constitutional regions? How will the Council establish and monitor this respect for the competences of the constitutional regions?
Question No 9 by Josu Ortuondo Larrea ():
Declaration No 54 attached to the Treaty of Amsterdam, on subsidiarity, states: –It is taken for granted by the German, Austrian and Belgian governments that action by the European Community in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity not only concerns the Member States but also their entities to the extent that they have their own law-making powers conferred on them under national constitutional law.’ Similarly, Declaration No 23 attached to the Treaty of Nice, on the future of the Union, states in its third paragraph: ‘In 2001, the Swedish and Belgian Presidencies, in cooperation with the Commission and involving the European Parliament, will encourage wide-ranging discussions with all interested parties’; and, in its fourth paragraph: ‘the European Council, at its meeting in Laeken in December 2001, will agree on a declaration containing appropriate initiatives for the continuation of this process’.
What approach will the Belgian presidency take to Declaration No 54 attached to the Treaty of Amsterdam, on the principle of subsidiarity and the entities having exclusive powers? What does the Belgian presidency believe to be the best means of resolving potential conflicts arising from decisions of the EU institutions where such decisions clash with the exclusive powers of those entities? Would the correct solution not be for the European Court of Justice to be given the power to rule on any appeals lodged by those constitutional entities and for the Treaties to legitimate the power of those entities to defend their interests in court at Union level?
Question No 10 by Camilo Nogueira Román ():
What proposals does the Council intend to make to ensure that the planned 2004 reform of the Treaties includes the recognition and underpinning of the political and legislative powers of internal units within the Member States (nationalities, federal states, autonomous communities or constitutional regions) in their executive, legislative and judicial relations with the EU institutions?
The December 2000 Nice European Council approved a Declaration on the future of the Union. The declaration calls for a wide-ranging and searching debate on the European Union’s future. Not only the Member States but also states applying for accession, national parliaments, the European Parliament and the general public are all to be involved in that debate. The European Council has thus improperly and in absolute disregard for the subsidiarity principle, bypassed the democratic legitimacy of the constitutionally established regions.
The Belgian Foreign Affairs Minister Louis Michel recently repeated his intention to allow MEPs to sit also as members of the Belgian Parliament. We welcome what Mr Michel has to say about the closer involvement of members of parliaments, provided that he also includes the elected representatives of communes and regions. Will the Council, in deference to the subsidiarity principle, include the constitutionally established regions in the plans it is drawing up for Europe’s future?
Question No 2 by Pere Esteve ():
In view of the increasingly important and prominent involvement of the sub-state levels in the various EU decision-making procedures, the broad debate on the future of the Union which is taking shape mainly around the Laeken Summit should also provide answers to institutional issues relating to the involvement, from the legislative and judicial points of view, of constitutional regions (sub-state entities with their own legislative powers guaranteed under the Constitution of the State to which they belong) in the development, implementation, monitoring and assessment of EU policies.
Is the Council therefore intending to amend the Treaties (Part Five, Section 4) in such a way as to grant these regions the right to appeal direct to the Court of Justice when their prerogatives are under threat, as the Member States are able to do?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Subject: Declaration No 54 attached to the Treaty of Amsterdam on subsidiarity"1
"Subject: Laeken Declaration"1
"Subject: Recognition of the political and legislative competences of constitutional regions and nationalities"1
"Subject: The Laeken Declaration"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples