Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-12-Speech-1-058"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011112.5.1-058"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking Mrs Maij-Weggen for her comments. I have heartily enjoyed the way we have worked together on this and I am pleased to say that the work in her report represents our joint work. I also accept what she has said on the amendments.
Before I speak further, I should like the services to rule whether Amendment No 17 from the Green Group is admissible, because it seeks to rewrite the regulation. It calls on Parliament to adopt criteria for the definition of sensitive information and documents. Now the definition of sensitive documents is contained in the regulation, Article 9, reference to Article 4(1)(a).
I should again like to thank Mrs Maij-Weggen for her consistent approach to transparency and openness. It is absolutely right that we adopt changes to our Rules of Procedure so that we not only conform to the regulation on access to documents but can also begin to be held accountable by the citizens whom we purport to represent.
Therefore, now that Commissioner Barnier is here, it is important for me to refer to some of my concerns about the entry into force of this regulation on 3 December 2001. When the regulation enters into force, the citizen's right of access to institution documents will no longer be a discretionary concession but a fundamental right, rooted in Article 255. As no other legal basis on access to documents is provided in the Treaty, the regulation on Article 255 will be the framework for all other secondary legislation and for the internal rules of the institutions, which should be in conformity with it. The Commission, therefore, has the responsibility to present formal proposals to repeal or amend secondary legislation which is not coherent with the principles and limits defined in Article 18(3) of the regulation. This is extremely important if we are to bring this regulation into force.
Similarly, on the wider definition of institutions and the bodies and agencies, the Commission is mandated by Recital 8 and by the joint statement to review the rules of agencies and, where necessary to propose amendments as soon as possible.
On the matter of the Interinstitutional Committee – and all of these points are relevant if we are ourselves adopting changes to the Rules of Procedure – the Council presidency has said that it believes the Interinstitutional Committee should operate at secretary-general level. This differs from the opinion of President Prodi and of Parliament. Though I hesitate to say this, it is nonsense to suggest that secretaries-general should sit in this Interinstitutional Committee. The whole point of political presence is political accountability.
Finally, Mrs Maij-Weggen has done an excellent job on this and now is the time for the Commission to ensure that the Treaty is respected and that the regulations flowing therefrom are brought before Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples