Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-15-Speech-3-168"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-05-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Council reform2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020515.8.3-168"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-05-15-Speech-3-1692
lpv:speaker	lp:Elmar Brok2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3,3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2002-03-08--2004-07-19)3,3 chair; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-22--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2002-01-22--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; AFCO (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Secretary-General, Commissioner, well done to the Council for thinking about its own reform. There is, in fact, a great deal we can do without treaty amendments and it is indeed important for us to think about efficiency and transparency as we do so. I think that splitting the Foreign Affairs Council from the General Affairs Council is, as Mr Corbett has just said, the right starting point on the administrative side. On the legislative side, we really do need public meetings. Public meetings in the sense that the Council as a whole is publicly accountable, so that our citizens know who is responsible for what and so that the public interaction between the legislators, between Parliament and the Council, can take place in public, so that our citizens can understand who is responsible for what in Europe. I think that this also has a positive side effect and will bring about a degree of improvement in that the individual specialist Councils would then become committees of the legislative Council rather than legislative bodies in their own right, with the negative, unbalanced results which that might bring. But what is also of paramount importance, I think, is that we make sure in our declarations in the run up to Seville that these endeavours, which are right and proper, do not end up stealing the Convention's thunder and we make sure that the control functions tally and that Parliament's codecision function is not undermined. What we want to avoid, when decision-making procedures are dealt out, is a situation in which the European Council becomes the supreme legislator in the European Union with no codecision ties to the European Parliament – a situation in which only the Council can legislate. I warn you, if that is what is being attempted, we should write down anything and everything which might weaken Parliament and the Commission and reduce the potential for control before the Convention reaches any conclusions, because otherwise the good image of Seville may be in serious jeopardy. Be careful not to entertain notions such as these, notions which I sometimes hear coming out of Berlin and London."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph