Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-15-Speech-3-157"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020515.8.3-157"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Secretary-General of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, all the opinion polls on Europe which we have been analysing show that, in the eyes of our citizens, our institutions are very complex, in fact too complex, that they are not transparent, and that they are too far away. I myself believe that this complexity, or at least part of it, should be assumed and explained by each of our institutions, because this complex aspect is the price we have to pay in order to have a Europe which is united without being, at the same time, uniform.
Finally, and following Mr Solana’s example, I shall close by saying that we also say yes to more transparency. This is now obligatory, following Regulation No 1049/2001 and the measures which Parliament, the Council and the Commission have already taken and will be taking shortly with regard to the question of access to preparatory texts. This will make the Community legislative process easier to understand. However, a number of documents are already accessible. Above all it is a question of helping members of the public to find more easily the information that they are seeking. There will soon be a joint brochure issued by the three institutions, which should help them to do just that. Above all, we shall achieve even greater transparency by giving maximum publicity to the deliberations of the Council, particularly when it is engaged in the legislative process.
That is the spirit in which we welcome Mr Solana’s report, together with the innovative and practical proposals that it contains and, of course, as Mr Solana has said on several occasions himself, knowing that a large part of the progress, the reforms and the improvements will depend on the existence of an immediate political willingness on the part of the European Council and, a little later, on the existence of a political willingness within the Convention, and then within the future Inter-Governmental Conference, when we shall have to discuss more fundamental and more substantial reforms.
That does not mean, however, that as far as the remaining – not inconsiderable – amount of complexity is concerned there is no room for improvement, or no need for changes to be made, particularly at a time when we are getting ready to face numerous threats to the operation of the European Union, with 30 countries (initially 25) sitting around the table instead of 15. We are well aware, as Javier Solana has said, that the essential reforms will require amendments to the Treaties. There have already been some amendments, but they were, to say the very least, far from being enough. This means that if we are to succeed this time we must first of all discuss the tasks of the Union, and that is what we are doing in the context of the Convention. That is the Convention’s work on the future of the Union.
However, other reforms can be carried out now within the present legal framework, simply, if there is a willingness to do so, by changing habits or practices. As far as the European Commission is concerned, on whose behalf I am speaking, at President Prodi’s instigation we have begun a series of internal reforms. We have launched quite a broad programme of administrative reforms involving the working methods of all our departments. As for the Council, it has been carrying out its own reflections, initially on the basis of a report whose recommendations, made in 1999, have not yet been followed up. It seems to me that the great strength of Javier Solana’s report is that it relaunches the debate in very specific terms, even in a somewhat pedagogical manner, and, as he himself has said, that it provides – already in Barcelona and shortly in Seville – a basis for creating political willingness among the Heads of State and Government.
These basic documents remind us of the need for more structured planning of the Union’s initiatives at the level of the Presidency, and confirm the need for better horizontal coordination of the various formations of the Council. They envisage a European Council which is centred on its role of providing political impetus and, finally, they recognise the need for greater transparency in the legislative process.
For the Commission, this debate is a very important one, and Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, is making an extremely constructive and substantial contribution to it, thanks to the work of your rapporteurs, Mrs Maij-Weggen and Mr Poos. On behalf of the Commission, I should simply like to assure you of our support for the four aspects of the reflections being undertaken regarding the reform of the Council.
Regarding the first aspect, we say yes to the idea of introducing, as soon as possible and wherever possible, improvements to the way in which the Council works. The Commission supports the Council’s intention of implementing, in the near future, every possible initiative which does not require an amendment to the Treaties, while leaving it to the Convention to draw up more global and definitive proposals for the future institutional system of the European Union.
On the second aspect, we say yes to the principles of consistency, efficacy and transparency on which the Solana report wants the reform of the Council to be based. As the Commission has already had occasion to emphasise in the White Paper on governance, each of our institutions must, of course, concentrate on its essential tasks. However, the reform of the Council is not only necessary for the Council itself: it is also necessary for the other institutions and for the Union itself. As for making sure that the Council goes back to concentrating on its essential functions, I would just note in passing that the conclusions of the European Council in Barcelona, the Commission’s proposals and those expressed by Parliament in its various resolutions, including those that you will be adopting at the end of this debate, are all in line with one another. For example, the Council should be organised differently when it is creating legislation, with open debates and public votes. On the subject of a possible legislative Council, I have nothing to add to what I told you when we were examining the Poos report last October.
Thirdly, on behalf of the Commission I shall say yes to what I would call the rediscovery of the Community method, because this is the only method that gives us a chance of resolving certain difficulties immediately. For example, one of the objectively important and delicate questions concerning the way the Council works is the question of the rotation of the presidency, a question which Javier Solana spoke about just now. We have two options: one option which, in order to stabilise the presidency, assumes that the Treaties will have to be amended, and another option which would not require any such amendment. In the case of the second option, I would point out that continuity in the Council’s work and consistency in the planning of successive presidencies can be achieved by the traditional route: the Commission proposes, and the European Parliament and the Council deliberate. The annual policy strategy submitted by the Commission will thus make it possible, this year, for the first time, for Council and Parliament to enter into a real and stable dialogue on the policy priorities and the working programme for next year.
We also support the idea, without amending the Treaties, of creating a Council responsible for horizontal questions. We support this idea, which would lead to such a body having assigned to it the original mission of the General Affairs Council, in other words the coordination of the Council’s specialised bodies and in particular the preparations for the European Council. Let us rely on Coreper, which should once again become the traditional route by which the Council’s meetings are prepared."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples