Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-10-22-Speech-3-120"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031022.5.3-120"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I wish first of all to pay tribute to the work carried out by Mr Brok. This report makes many points and puts forward a vision of Europe’s role in international relations that we basically share. We also agree with its confirmation of multilateralism and the ranking of Europe’s priorities in foreign policy and even with the positions it adopts on the Middle East. If we had the time, I could give you many further examples.
There is one point, however, that I do wish to address, which is the issue of parliament’s rights in the field of foreign policy. Like you, I believe that the European Parliament should be better informed. This is stipulated in a recent agreement between the Council, the Commission and our House and it must be fully implemented.
I do have some reservations, however, about the report’s more extreme demands. History has often shown that an effective foreign policy does not sit well with extended parliamentary powers. An assembly is a place of debate and discussion and, if necessary, of decision-making. Parliamentary time essentially extends over a long period whereas foreign policy must be conducted on a daily basis. Incidentally, Parliament is also, sometimes, a place of conflict between groups of necessarily differing opinions. I believe, however, that in terms of conducting its external policy, any community would benefit from demonstrating as much unity as possible. We also note that, in all democratic countries, the role of national parliaments in foreign policy follows particular rules.
My last comment is that enhancing parliamentary rights would not make Europe's foreign policy more comprehensible. Let us not produce some tangled web of additional competences that would further complicate the European public’s understanding of our actions.
I shall conclude by saying that, as regards the CFSP, I do not believe it would be a good idea to call for equal rights with the other EU institutions. Let us ask questions, let us make recommendations, if necessary, but let us not go so far as to call for the power to deliver opinions on matters of external policy. For the CFSP, as for other matters, furthermore, let us rely on the judicious recommendations of the Convention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples