Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-232"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-04-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Monitoring the application of Community law (2003-2004) - Better lawmaking 2004: application of the principle of subsidiarity - The implementation consequences and impact of the internal market legislation in force - Strategy for the simplification of the regulatory environment (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060404.22.2-232"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-04-04-Speech-2-2332
lpv:speaker	lp:Klaus-Heiner Lehne2
lpv:spokenAs	member; JURI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-08-31--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ECON (2005-10-27--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; Committee of Inquiry into the crisis of the Equitable Life Assurance Society (2006-01-19--2007-06-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I have the impression that this debate has made it clear that the problem at the heart of our discussion here is regulatory impact assessments. In my opinion, it has absolutely nothing to do with democracy being replaced with technocracy. That is not what this is about. It goes without saying that the democratic institutions are still in control. The Commission makes decisions on proposals on its own responsibility, as, of course, do Parliament and the Council. This matter hinges on a vital point, namely that we are changing the procedures governing our support. Currently, the EU makes legislation on the basis of ‘learning by doing’. We decide on something, and something comes out of it in the end that has some effect or other. If we subsequently discover that the effect is undesirable, we have the problem that, thanks to the EU’s complex procedures, we cannot just quickly amend these laws, as national parliaments do, but need a complex procedure lasting many years to revise directives and amend regulations. Thus, different mechanisms are needed from those often existing at national level. We need to know what we are doing. What regulatory impact assessments do is give us support; we are informed of the consequences our actions will have by independent people, too. Even though, ultimately, the political decision remains ours to take, we still need this support. That is quite crucial when the Commission, the Council and Parliament have to take decisions on behalf of 470 million people in such a large economic area. For that reason, too, it is vital to have an independent element. I would appeal quite clearly once more to the Commission to work to ensure the introduction of this independent element within its own structures, too. If it does not, Parliament – if it takes itself seriously – will be forced to conduct its own independent impact assessments in each case. That is contrary to the spirit of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2003. We should like the Commission to do this on its own initiative, so that we have sound bases for decision."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph