Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-18-Speech-2-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031118.2.2-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, I must begin by speaking on behalf of the Socialist Group. I would like to convey our condolences to the families of all those who lost their lives in recent terrorist attacks. We stand shoulder to shoulder with the families of the Italian servicemen and of the Iraqi citizens who died. We also wish to express our solidarity with the families of victims of the attacks on the synagogues in Istanbul. The latter represent the Sephardi community in Turkey. The word Sepharad means Spain in Hebrew. It should be recalled that five centuries ago those Jewish communities found a haven of tolerance in the Ottoman Empire when my own country was not disposed to accept them.
Moving on, Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Poettering for bringing politics into this debate. It does seem strange that we are unable to speak of politics here. I did indeed say to the President of the Commission that he ought to resign if ever he decided to stand in the elections to the European Parliament. I said more besides. Firstly, the President of the Commission currently enjoys the support of practically all shades of the political spectrum in the House. He must therefore fulfil his responsibilities. As a citizen, however, he is entitled to make known his vision of the future of Europe. I therefore believe that the fact that he drafted this document on the European dream is a positive development. I should add that I find the document far superior to the speech he gave today.
This said, I detected a degree of pique in what Mr Poettering said. He seemed to resent that someone who apparently belonged to one side should have defected to the other. As I see it, one has every right to correct oneself and mature as a person as one journeys through life. I for one welcome the fact that President Prodi has adopted a more socially and politically progressive stance. There should be abundant opportunity to discuss this in the future.
In any case, between now and the last day of this legislature what we really need is a strong and determined Commission. I would say that the same applies to the Council. I believe the most outrageous behaviour we have witnessed during these last few days was when the President of the Council departed totally from the line taken by the Council of Ministers, the Commission and Parliament. He made unacceptable pronouncements concerning Chechnya and Russia. You all have the power to rectify the situation. We could join together when we vote tomorrow on the draft resolution on the Russia Summit.
I should now like to focus on President Prodi’s speech. Firstly, I should like to say that I am not about to complain on behalf of my group about there being fewer proposals. Our difficulty is simply that we do not know what the proposals are. We have been informed that Vice-President de Palacio plans to meet committee chairmen. No doubt we shall find out then. In connection with assessing the Commissioners’ politics I should just like to mention that I shall be sending Mr Poettering the statements made on the Socialists by Mrs de Palacio. It has to be said that she does not miss a single Popular Party function in Spain. Mr Prodi is not the only one to be active in politics back home. We all are.
Mr Prodi resorted to expressions more commonly used by weather forecasters in order to describe growth. He stated the outlook was set fair. I believe it would be very helpful for him to explain, on behalf of the Commission, how the latter intends to adapt the Stability and Growth Pact to the new situation. This is a crucially important request. It goes hand in hand with the need to strengthen economic governance. I have also been struck by the fact that the financial perspective has been left until last, as if it were an afterthought. The Delors plan of ten years ago has indeed been revived. As I see it, it is important to discuss research and development, not just infrastructure. They are the nervous system energising the whole of the Community. I have also been struck that so little detail has been provided concerning reform of cohesion policy following the debate on the Sapir report and Commissioner Barnier’s statements. I believe the President of the Commission should be much more explicit. After all, this issue is crucial to the new Member States and also to the balance between current Member States.
Secondly, Mr Prodi devoted practically half of this speech to Eurostat. I would like to suggest a number of qualifications here. Firstly, through the Casaca report, the European Parliament played a decisive role in the Eurostat issue, over and above the many reports drafted within the Commission and OLAF. I believe this must be emphasised, because new instruments are being introduced whilst overlooking the crucial role played by the European Parliament. I regret the other groups in the House did not agree to debate the Bösch report on fraud to coincide with the President’s presence. This report is available and the President himself referred to it. Regarding Eurostat, I note the proposal to define the nature of political responsibility and the reform of the Commission’s code of conduct. Nonetheless, I am surprised that a new instrument amounting in practice to a duplication of OLAF is now being proposed. I fear we may end up in a situation resembling the one illustrated by a cartoon from the Soviet era. This cartoon showed a citizen being trailed by two KGB agents. They were in turn being trailed by a further two agents and so on. The line of people all minding each other went off into the distance.
This is not a case of multiplying the instruments, but of acting in a clear and democratic manner. There is an important role for Parliament to play here. I do not think that the situation will be resolved by creating a new power centre within the Commission. Finding a loophole in every law is a widespread human weakness. I believe there are sayings to this effect in every language. There is certainly one in Spanish. It follows that bringing out more and more rules and regulations will not necessarily improve matters. What is required is the option of specific monitoring. In my view, the idea of establishing a link between OLAF and the European Prosecutor could be a way forward. I would like to hear the Council’s view on this rather than the Commission’s, since the main opposition to the European Prosecutor comes from the governments. It is not a contentious issue amongst ourselves. Mr President, I therefore feel it is essential to negotiate an urgent procedure to allow these issues to be discussed before the end of this legislature.
President of the Commission, I would like to enquire whether you were thinking of a compromise solution for the December Conference Summit when you referred to 25 or 30 Commissioners. If the two figures are added together some countries end up with two Commissioners. My final point is the following: I should like to know if you are standing by your proposal to distribute portfolios and organise a Commission composed of so-called senior and junior Commissioners."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples