Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-09-Speech-2-053"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Simplifying and improving Community regulation2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040309.4.2-053"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-09-Speech-2-0542
lpv:speaker	lp:Ioannis Koukiadis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (2002-02-05--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-21--2004-07-19)3 member; PETI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees and Delegation for relations with Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we know that our honourable friend, Mr Medina Ortega, has tremendous experience in this matter and, with his proposals to date, has helped a great deal with the job of simplifying and modernising the legislative work of the Community. We have the interinstitutional agreement which the Commissioner talked about. However, I should like to ask this question: despite what we have today, can we say that we have a simple action plan with a specific hierarchy of objectives, with a specific timetable, with a proposal for specific measures for each objective and with a clearly defined procedure for measuring objectives? What interests us is to see quantifiable results in the wake of the interinstitutional agreement. With reference to the question, I ask you: are we in fact satisfied with the improvement so far in the quality of the regulatory environment? I do not think that we should reply in the affirmative because pioneering measures are missing. In all events, and here I absolutely agree with Mr Medina, improving the regulatory environment means restricting the role of bureaucracy, for which the Commission is responsible. It also means rejecting the perception that efficiency or improvement go hand in glove with a reduction in democratic control. On these two issues, unfortunately, the Commission has not so far taken a clear stand. Having said that, I should like to emphasise that we, the European Parliament, have a huge problem. Here we have to combine the cultures of 15 – and soon 25 – states and, of course, the freedom of proposal from all sides. We face the phenomenon of an exponential rise in the number of amendments and how they can be coordinated and how they can result in a homogenous and clear text, no one knows. We therefore also have an endogenous problem which we need to address, and here I am of the opinion that, to date, we have been lacking clear-cut services to take care of the technical aspects of legislation and help developments. Nonetheless, the major problem remains the fourth stage in the overall regulatory framework, which is implementation. Unfortunately, even today, after so many reports on the implementation of law, a huge delay can be seen in control by the Commission of the method of implementation and the judicial and administrative authorities do not have assimilation mechanisms and have not assimilated Community law. So this problem needs to be addressed if we want proper implementation of Community law."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph