Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-241"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.5.3-241"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, it is of course clear from the documentation produced by Statewatch that negotiations concerning these agreements were embarked upon as early as last autumn and that they have been conducted in the greatest secrecy. The request by Tony Bunyan of Statewatch that the documents be made available for scrutiny has been met with partial rejection because the negotiations concerned were secret. The fact is, of course, that, according to the Treaty, Parliament is not entitled to be consulted on these matters, and the question therefore arises as to why it has not been publicly stated that these developments are part of the anti-terrorist measures that are being worked on. My first question is about why the Council is holding its cards so close to its chest when these are matters of very broad general interest that are at stake. My second question is about how far these agreements extend. Looking at Titles V and VI of the Treaty on European Union, it is apparent from Article 24 that, when it is necessary to conclude an agreement with one or more States etc in implementation of these Titles, agreements may be entered into on behalf of the Council without Parliament’s being consulted and without any public debate. In the view of the President-in-Office of the Council, how far do these powers extend and why has Parliament not been informed?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples