Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-25-Speech-4-022"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030925.3.4-022"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it has been wonderful to start the day listening to people here actually trying to outdo one another with regard to the heartfelt praise that has been lavished on my fellow countryman, Jacob Söderman. I wish all the best to those continuing this work.
As a fairly new member of the Committee on Petitions, it has been especially interesting for me to become acquainted with its work, which includes familiarising myself with its annual report. Particularly now, when we are having a debate on the future of the Committee on Petitions, it is excellent that we should have a report which, once you read it, makes you realise that the special position the Committee on Petitions has among the committees as a whole really cannot be emphasised enough.
It is important, however, that good legislation should be enacted at European level, particularly in such areas as environmental protection, where problems do not recognise international borders. How, though, will it benefit us or the environment if Member States apply European legislation only when it does not clash with other interests? Although the national authorities, and ultimately the courts, have the principal obligation to monitor compliance with Community legislation, there is also a need for European legal redress when citizens do not fulfil their obligations. As an ordinary citizen is not generally in a position to submit a matter to the Court of Justice of the European Communities to decide on, the options he or she is mainly left with are either to make a complaint to the Commission or to petition the European Parliament. It is, of course, primarily the task of the Commission to monitor compliance with EU legislation on behalf of the EU, but then again it does not always seem over-anxious to interfere in the affairs of the Member States.
Petitions do not come from us in Finland or the other Nordic countries in any large numbers. One isolated case, which threatens the diversity of nature in Finland, is the Vuosaari Harbour Project in Helsinki, and that came under Community scrutiny having gone through this very petition process, an exercise the Finnish authorities have regarded as futile. Vuosaari is an example of a case in which the Commission has been unable, for one reason or another, to intervene.
When you read Laura González Álvarez’s report, you can, however, say that the Committee on Petitions has proved to be an excellent route to open democracy and real concrete results."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples