Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-22-Speech-2-240"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021022.8.2-240"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the PPE’s Congress in Estoril has now advocated complete transparency in the legislative process in the Council. All the important political forces therefore support the transparency placed on the agenda when the Danes voted against the Treaty of Maastricht on 2 June 1992. We have seen progress in a number of areas, but we also have a number of things to look forward to. The Commission now publishes its agendas and the minutes of the meetings at which decisions are taken. It is important to know who said what and how they voted. The Commissioners must be accountable to the public. The Council has issued minutes relating to the working party’s discussions on transparency. We must have similar access to other working parties’ working documents and minutes, and we must have access immediately so that we can follow developments before the laws are adopted.
We are currently debating a proposal for a compromise on Parliament’s access to confidential information, but the new rules would limit that access to which all MEPs are entitled under the Treaty. I believe we could make more progress by going to the Court of Justice, as has been done with great success in connection with proper agreements. I shall not therefore vote in favour of the compromise.
If truth be told, the European Parliament has never negotiated anything in the way of progress. There have been individual MEPs who have exerted pressure, together with the Ombudsman and active citizens who have won one legal case after another. It is before the Court of Justice in Luxembourg that we have achieved most progress, not in negotiations between the Council, the Commission and Parliament. That is the sad fact. The European Parliament is always ready to make demands, but it becomes silent whenever, as now, there is the possibility of a framework agreement’s being entered into or a regulation on transparency’s being negotiated, entailing the danger of documents at present publicly available in Denmark and Sweden being regarded as secret as soon as they are forwarded to the EU.
Nor am I happy with the new agreement, and I would call upon the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy to go to the Court of Justice in connection with those documents we cannot obtain, such as the screening reports on the candidate countries’ adjustments to EU legislation. The screening reports are very good examples of documents it should be possible for everyone here in the Chamber and in the candidate countries’ parliaments to read. I doubt if we should be able to obtain them under the new rules. I cannot imagine the Court of Justice preventing us from obtaining documents that are a clear part of the legislative process. I believe we can obtain more progress by putting up a fight than by entering now into a poor compromise."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples