Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-20-Speech-3-065"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021120.1.3-065"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, it has been a great pleasure to take part in this dialogue, which is the first of its kind. I know this because I was sitting over there as a Member of Parliament last year when the Commission presented its legislative programme, and at that time the way of working was completely different. Moreover, there was criticism from Parliament that we have heard nothing of today. This is a testament to the great progress that has been made in the dialogue between the Council and Parliament, and I am happy to be present on this occasion, too, and to contribute to the dialogue for a couple of minutes, without delaying the start of the voting at 12 noon sharp.
The Presidency is very pleased with the Commission’s proposals. We have noted the priorities set by the legislative and work programme, and I can say on behalf of the Council that we support the Commission’s intention to apply impact assessments to the chief legislative initiatives. This is something that Mr Clegg mentioned, and I believe Mrs Frassoni also talked about. In this connection, I wish to say to both Mrs Frassoni and Mr Swoboda that I too should have liked more progress to be made on the interinstitutional agreement on better lawmaking. We had an excellent meeting in Brussels on 1 October, which I believe both Mrs Frassoni and Mr Swoboda attended, and I sensed that we were very close to reaching tangible agreement on a number of points. Now, of course, time is running out, and so if we are to achieve a result by the end of the year, I would suggest that we now set ourselves some realistic goals, that we set out the points we can agree on and that we also show a degree of flexibility. The Council can make concessions on some points, for example these alternative or weak forms of regulation that Mrs Frassoni spoke about. I believe that we can reach agreement on that. Then there are other matters which are more difficult, for example comitology, where it is well known that different countries have different traditions; but let us now reach agreement on as much as possible. I am prepared to continue the dialogue, which has unfortunately been extended and interrupted. Let us resume this dialogue, and let us ask our government officials to give us a basis for discussion in the near future.
It is now up to the Greek and Italian Presidencies, therefore, to draw up a joint work programme for the Council for the coming year. The new work programme will be presented to the Council in December: probably on 9–10 December. I understand that the vote on the Commission’s programme here in Parliament is taking place as early as 5 December. I am convinced that the upcoming Presidencies will pay due regard not only to the Commission work programme but also to the views on the work programme that Parliament has expressed and is going to express in the days ahead.
I also wish to thank Mr Vitorino for his words on asylum and immigration. As I happen to be President of the Council which deals with such matters, I should like to confirm everything Mr Vitorino said. We aim to complete new sets of rules on the reception of asylum seekers, the definition of a refugee and also the question as to which state is responsible for examining an asylum application.
I would say to Mr Titley, who called for a policy towards our new neighbours after enlargement, that, the day before yesterday, the General Affairs Council in Brussels worked out a more long-term strategy, to be implemented in cooperation with the candidate countries; a strategy that shall ensure that these new borders towards the east are cooperative borders rather than another Iron Curtain.
Finally, I wish to address Mr Barón Crespo, who raised the question as to what the situation will be as regards the Commission, which will include Commissioners from the new Member States, and how the transition will take place. As I announced yesterday, the General Affairs Council recommended the day before yesterday at its meeting in Brussels that accession take place on 1 May, and that the brand new Commission, including Commissioners from the new Member States, take office on 1 November, so that the new Parliament has enough time to approve the new Commissioners. In this way, in the intervening period, from 1 May to 1 November, there will be Commissioners from the new Member States who do not have a portfolio, and who therefore do not need to be approved by Parliament. But this is all just a recommendation. I mentioned it yesterday because it is of course only possible with the cooperation of Parliament, and it is in the spirit of this good working relationship that I mentioned the Council’s thoughts. We are completely open to Parliament’s thoughts on the subject."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples