Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-17-Speech-1-073"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011217.3.1-073"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, the European Council's Laeken Declarations express the opinion that the European project derives its legitimacy from its democratic, transparent and efficient institutions. The Council having then put the question – which it asked the Convention to discuss – whether Parliament should play an enhanced role, it will probably not surprise you that I, as a parliamentarian, answer that unreservedly in the affirmative, for this Parliament is the only one of the institutions to be directly elected by the people. All its sittings are in public and comprehensible – I wish the Council's were – and the speed with which we are capable of reaching decisions – on the European arrest warrant for example – leads me to the conclusion that we are more efficient than the Council and, in many ways, even more so than the Commission.
So, when the Council at Laeken welcomes the Commission's White Paper on European governance and the so-called Mandelkern report and expects an action plan on the subject from the Commission in the first half of 2002, I hope that, when doing so, the Council has in mind the intention of strengthening Parliament's role . Quite apart from that, we would, as parliamentarians, be happy to discuss new forms of governance with the Commission and the Council. So, for example, the Commission has proposed an interinstitutional working party, but I gather that the Council has so far found that unacceptable and has declined to take part in it. I hope we can at least manage, before Barcelona and Seville, to have in-depth discussions with the Council and the Commission on new forms of governance, which will not even be conceivable without Parliament's consent.
I am aware that many governments find us too independent and self-sufficient, and the Commission and the Council are sometimes disturbed by our excessive ‘interference’ in details. As a Parliament, we are also prepared to accept new ways of dividing up the work between ourselves, the Commission and the Council, for we too must prepare ourselves for an enlarged EU. We take the view, though, that any delegation of tasks must involve a call-back mechanism, for the search for new forms of European governance and the consideration of new divisions of competences between the EU and the Member States must not be at the expense of European parliamentary life. On the contrary, Parliament's role must be solidly entrenched in the European constitution.
Let me make one last comment on what we call civil society. The European Council has decided to set up a forum, something for which Mr Barnier, in his role as Commissioner, has frequently and with verve expressed his open support. We welcome the establishment of such a forum, but, just as a forum of this sort supplements the deliberations of the Convention rather than supplanting them, so civil society and discussions within it do not replace Parliament, but add something to it. It is in this sense that we very much desire dialogue with civil society and with our citizens, and we hope that the Council and the Commission do not see this as over against Parliament, but as an addition to it."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples