Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-13-Speech-1-057"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030113.5.1-057"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the united Europe, which was embarked on in Copenhagen will be an extremely diverse Europe, first of all in terms of economic and social diversity. Never before has there been such great economic disparity within the European Union and, at the same time, furthermore, never before has a genuine cohesion policy been so crucial. There will be cultural and political diversity, but also territorial diversity. In fact, I used this exact expression – territorial diversity – as one of the three themes of the Second Report on economic and social cohesion entitled ‘Unity, solidarity, diversity for Europe, its people and its territory’, just over one year ago.
Lastly – and this is my fourth point of agreement with your report, Mr Napolitano - we are in favour of a strong European and territorial cohesion policy, which means something real for each region of the Union and the citizens of the Union. In this area, which I am familiar with because it is my responsibility within the Commission, both the Commission and Parliament will have a great deal of work to accomplish together in the months ahead, before I present, at the end of this year, the Commission proposals for future regional policy after 2006.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is precisely because, as I have just said, we agree on the broad lines of this report that I would like to express the Commission’s concern on a point that I know has also been the subject of debates and questions here in Parliament. It concerns the opportunity for certain regions alone, those with legislative powers, to defend their rights before the Court of Justice. Furthermore, I spoke very frankly to these regions with legislative powers a few weeks ago in Florence, at one of their meetings. I believe it is neither realistic nor desirable to establish this kind of distinction between European territorial authorities. For example, how can we confer important, individual rights on these regions, while not all the current and future Member States are organised in this way? Our institutional system must not favour one system over another. It must, I repeat, be neutral, fair and impartial.
Regions with legislative powers, however, which have their own responsibilities, are facing difficulties that we do not want to ignore. Why, therefore, to respond to one of their requests – and this is an option I raised with their president – do we not take inspiration from the positive experience of Article 203 of the Treaty, as intelligent use of this article enabled us to facilitate the participation of these regions in the Council itself? Why should access to Community justice not follow this example, or at least its spirit? That is why I find it interesting that some of you – in particular Mr Corbett, and also Mr Méndez de Vigo, I am told – have made progress in finding a way out of this dead end. This would consist of giving each State clear responsibility for taking cases to the Court of Justice on behalf of these territorial authorities.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are not trying to pit the regions against the States or against Europe, or even less so the States against Europe. We are trying to choose a culture of cooperation rather than maintaining a culture of confrontation. The regions must be able to count on the Member States to obtain genuine political and legal representation within the Union. The regions must be able to count on the European Union to involve them systematically in all stages of the European decision-making process. The European Union, for its part, must be able to continue to count on the constructive, loyal cooperation of all the territorial authorities: the regions, of course, but also towns, cities and subregional territorial structures. It must be able to count on their contributions to the debate on European democracy.
It is this diversity that explains why the task given to your rapporteur, Mr Napolitano, on this matter, was extremely difficult as regards defining the role of regional and local authorities in the European Union. As he said, we shall hold a sitting specifically devoted to this subject within the Convention on 6 and 7 February.
Mr Napolitano, you have completed this task with your usual talent and wisdom and, ladies and gentlemen, it will not surprise you to learn that I agree with the rapporteur on many of the points in his report.
Mr Napolitano was wise enough to point out that if the European Union wishes to function without becoming a super-State, it must respect the right of each State to organise itself as it sees fit. It is not, therefore, the role of the European institutions or the Commission to propose, or even less, to decide, in Brussels, how competences are to be divided within each country, or how relations between territories should be organised within each Member State.
It is therefore with this restriction in mind that the Commission is able to approve the main points of the report presented. We are in favour of a more prominent role for the Committee of the Regions provided that the interinstitutional balance remains as it is today. The Committee’s right to recourse to the Court of Justice deserves consideration, if necessary, in order to defend respect for the principle of subsidiarity.
We are in favour of what your report calls ‘new participatory methods’ so that regional and local authorities might be more directly involved in Community procedures. In its White Paper on governance, the Commission advocated systematic dialogue with the associations representing these authorities, and we are currently finalising arrangements for this dialogue which, following extensive consultation, will be operational at the end of the first half of 2003.
We are in favour of adapting the implementation of EU legislation to take account of individual local circumstances and needs. The Commission will thus try out a pilot scheme of tripartite contracts, involving Brussels, the national capital and the region. Above and beyond this, generally speaking, the Treaty already provides us with plenty of room for manoeuvre through framework legislation. The three institutions responsible for legislative activity share responsibility for preventing these framework laws from entering into too much detail.
We must, however, take care to preserve the uniform, and therefore equal or fair, application of European law. We must not weaken the rules we adopt here, through democratic debate, by allowing the territorial authorities variable-geometry application, even on an exceptional basis.
I have talked about what happens initially, when drawing up Community texts, and what happens downstream, when they are implemented. In its contribution to the work of the Convention before the end of last year, the Commission prepared the ground in this area while expressing its desire to find the means to increase the involvement of the regional authorities throughout the process of European integration, while respecting the institutional system of each country."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples