Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-03-Speech-1-116"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010903.8.1-116"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, we should all look on the report on the application of Community law as one of the all important reports because this is the report which reflects the real state of the European Union, which measures its heart beat and how it relates to the man in the street on a daily basis. This report is the first to be drafted for this new decade, which is also the beginning of a new century, and I think that it could turn out to be an opportunity to take a more integrated approach to the problems associated with the practical operation of the single market, the European Union as a whole, and the vision of enlargement.
In view of three new factors, impending enlargement on an unprecedented scale, the quest for the deepening of the European Union and the ever-increasing rate of legislative intervention, we need to radically rethink how we control the application of Community law. This entire subject is inextricably bound up with the review of the Treaties and should be one of the top items on the agenda for the next Intergovernmental Conference. The White Paper identifies the problems; all we need to do now is to see how we can resolve them.
Unless we eliminate delays in transposing directives and unless we forge a uniform interpretation of Community law, there will be no single economic area and it will be impossible to promote the idea of European citizenship. A citizen from one country who goes to work in another country and has trouble getting his professional qualifications recognised feels like a foreigner, not a European. Competition rules applied selectively in various countries adulterate European competition and so on and so forth. That is why the question of the application of Community law must be a matter of concern to each and every one of us and why we must put it at the top of our agenda. It is futile to spend hours at a time debating whether or not this or that amendment will get through and then do almost nothing to check if a directive is being applied. Greater importance needs to be attached to this report because it reflects real life in the European Union.
A second line of approach taken in the report is to question what becomes of suggestions by the European Parliament from previous reports. I have read several previous reports containing interesting suggestions. I was surprised to discover that most fall by the wayside. However, more importantly, the Commission report contains no explanation as to why these suggestions were not applied. We need to find a way of ensuring that Parliament's suggestions are followed up.
The third basic comment is that, despite the improvements reflected in the data on the application of Community law, these improvements are not constant; there are reversals and the improvements are not impressive enough to appease us. The general diagnosis remains the same. We should therefore pay serious attention to this phenomenon and deal separately with the multiple reasons and causes for it.
I should like to use the time left to draw a few general conclusions. The best rate of transposition is in Denmark, with an average of 98%. As far as procedures for controlling infringements are concerned, we must remember that the control system as a whole is based on 4 stages. Letters of formal notice, which constitute the first stage, ran into large numbers. The three countries which received most letters were France, Italy and Greece, with 236, 160 and 154 and the three which received the fewest were Denmark, Finland and Sweden, with 40, 43 and 46. The number of reasoned opinions, which constitute the second stage, was fairly small, proving that this procedure is effective for certain countries and extremely effective for others. In all events, the relative reduction in the time taken to send out letters of formal notice and reasoned opinions is one positive aspect of attempts to speed up the control procedure. As far as referrals to the Court are concerned, the number of cases of non-compliance again fell significantly.
Our general conclusions are as follows: first, there has been a gradual reduction of 35%-40% from one stage to the next; secondly, the order of countries committing infringements remains the same at all stages; thirdly, at the third stage the number of cases of non-compliance is marginal for certain countries, with other countries persisting; fourthly, the efficiency of control procedures should not be used to play down the fact that these procedures are used by the Member States as a way of delaying the date of transposition, thereby creating a new de facto transitional period.
The fact that certain countries with different systems constantly perform worst, while certain other countries perform best means that, basically, infringements are a matter of political will. In other words, the problem of the application of Community law is a political problem and not a legal or technocratic one, as many believe. It masks the clash between national sovereignty and European authority and reveals just how much the European conscience has matured. Finally, the Commission has not analysed the circumstances or reasons behind these statistics. I do not wish to take up any more of your time but I would like to say a word or two about the amendments. I can accept two of the three proposed amendments. I do not understand Mrs Thors' amendment and it requires clarification if it is to be accepted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples