Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-05-Speech-4-172"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030605.3.4-172"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I challenge anyone to understand, when reading the Smet report, exactly what ‘open coordination procedure’ means. This is not the rapporteur’s fault as the Convention itself, which had considered including a definition of this working method in its text for a European constitution, eventually gave up due to the difficulties in doing so (Article I-14 of the current draft).
It was the Lisbon Council, in March 2000, that launched this expression, but with a definition that was too vague. The intention is, however, quite clear: it is about establishing flexible coordination to enable governments to establish links, exchange their experiences and to set general guidelines if necessary, but to then remain flexible in applying them.
Unfortunately, at this point the interpretations diverge. We think that this method should be developed as an alternative to the rigid harmonisations within the scope of the Treaty. The ‘integrationists’, on the other hand, want to use it to erode national powers and even tighten up the procedure by making it into a type of top-down planning method, along with restrictive calculated indicators. There is a complete lack of understanding."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples