Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-18-Speech-1-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021118.5.1-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to contribute to the debate this evening on behalf of my colleague, Lord Inglewood, who is a victim of the famous deer incident which has extensively been referred to already.
I would like to focus on the principles behind the proposal, rather than the detail, which has been covered very comprehensively by colleagues. This is a long-standing issue and it arouses understandable emotions. It is perfectly reasonable that Member States should wish to control tobacco advertising and sponsorship and the Commissioner was quite right in his opening statement where he particularly focused on directing advertising to young people, to try and control new smokers coming into the smoking market. But I would argue still that the zeal to do this must not override the principles of the European treaties.
We all know that the first time this was tried the Commission was too greedy. It exceeded those treaty powers and it lost the entire directive. In the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market – and I remind colleagues that this committee was right the first time round – this proposal runs the same risks. That is why we invite you to support our amendments. If you do not support them, you carry the risk of the whole directive falling.
The second point I wish to make concerns the whole question of subsidiarity. The Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market's proposal ensures that Member States take that responsibility. It derogates those powers to Member States. Mr Fiori said earlier on that it is not what we want to do, it is what is appropriate in the circumstances.
There is a lot of talk about subsidiarity at present. Many colleagues are engaged in debates on subsidiarity in the ambit of the convention. This is a real test of that. You may want to do something, but it is not necessarily in the competence of the European Union to do it. That is what we are saying in this case. That we should not discourage Member States from doing it. This is the real test of how serious you are about the principles of subsidiarity. That is why you should support the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market's line when we vote on Wednesday."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples