Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-04-Speech-3-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021204.4.3-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I rather suspect that voters outside this House would have some difficulty understanding what is going on here this afternoon and indeed some of us may. I wonder what the public would make of it.
Surely, the top and bottom of all this is that the majority of this House wants a sensible, standard remuneration package, salary, pension, reimbursement of expenses where practical on the basis of receipts and vouchers – the same sort of system that most of our voters are subject to in their workplaces. Of course, some will say we do not do an ordinary job of work. We are special. Yes, indeed we are special, we are public servants. I have sat in this House now for three years through innumerable discussions on this issue and we seem to move no further forward. What do we have on the table today? We have an exercise in subterfuge bogged down in a quagmire of procedure, I would hasten to suggest.
On the one hand, we are talking about a report – a report that was not a report, merely an advice – voted by one committee. On the other hand, we are talking about some feedback from yourself, Mr President, for which we are very grateful. But some people here do not even want to mention that. Confused? I certainly am.
Members have nothing of substance or detail before of them, nothing that they have the right to amend or that they all have the possibility to properly vote on. So, what are we discussing here? Some of us had hoped that we were at the very least talking about a process that would finally lead to a proper report setting out the detail of a proposed statute that would be clear, transparent and that every Member would have the right to amend and vote on and stand accountable to his or her voters and finally, once and for all, to draw a line under the criticism that we are so easily subject to.
Instead, we are bogged down in this interminable roundabout of discussion on procedure. But, help is at hand! Let us be clear, there is a very practical paragraph in the joint motion from three parties that would allow a practical process to take off. The very paragraph, of course, that is opposed by majorities within the big groups in this House. That paragraph is tabled individually as an amendment. So, be on notice: if you block that amendment, you block progress, you block this House from getting an open procedure that will lead to a statute and you stop this Parliament becoming worthy of the name of parliament and you will leave our citizens even more bemused and sceptical.
I would ask you, Mr President, also to check the procedure under which this question has been brought because I really wonder if it is acceptable procedure within our rules. I would not wish people to become any more confused than we already are."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples