Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-224"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060404.22.2-224"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, you are an eminent specialist on the ancient Japan of the Tokugawa era, during which people were deliberately kept in ignorance of laws deemed to be state secrets, knowledge of which was restricted to a small number of great lords, because it was thought that in this way people would retain far greater respect for standards about which they knew nothing. Well, I sometimes wonder whether we do not, in fact, draw our inspiration from this ancient Japanese legislation.
In reality, ladies and gentlemen, I think that the complexity of European law is the perverse effect of a group dynamic to which we are all party. What is it all about? Firstly, the initiative rests with the Commission, but behind every Commissioner, there is, of course, the general management and the officials who are part of it. Next, it passes to the Council. In theory, the Council is composed of ministers. They reach agreement on a text, provided that each of their respective bureaucracies recognises in it all of the standards that are to feature in the joint text, then the text is passed to Parliament and Parliament appoints a rapporteur. Naturally, the rapporteur, as is perfectly legitimate, wants his name to go down in history. His name is much more likely to be remembered if he adds standards rather than removes them, and that is without mentioning the Members who table amendments, the important role of lobbies and so on. Thus it is, ladies and gentlemen, that we arrive at a real regulatory monster.
I have been in this Parliament for 17 years and, right from the very first year of my taking up my seat here, there was already a debate being held on the simplification of European Community law. I have the impression that we are no farther forward with this than we were 17 years ago, the only difference being that the situation has got even worse.
What is to be done then? We have to agree on the meaning of the terms used. We need a proper dictionary of Community law, a code like the Civil Code, or the Commercial Code or the Penal Code, which is organised rationally and divided into parts, sub-parts, chapters, sections and articles, in such a way that, when we are working on a text, we know in advance that we are going to amend such and such an article. In short, we need to make a great effort towards simplification. I fear that, despite the good intentions expressed by the rapporteurs, we are not quite there yet. Thank you."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples