Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-13-Speech-2-309"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Implications of Case C-176/03 (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060613.28.2-309"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-06-13-Speech-2-3102
lpv:speaker	lp:Genowefa Grabowska2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; LIBE (2005-09-14--2007-01-14)3 member; AFCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 quaestor; Parliament's Bureau (2004-07-21--2007-01-15)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Socjaldemokracja Polska (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-09-29--2007-01-14)3 quaestor; European Parliament (2004-07-21--2007-01-15)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; DROI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Quaestors (2004-07-21--2007-01-15)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, by means of the Framework Decision on the protection of the environment through criminal law, the Council aimed to respond to the worrying increase in crimes against the environment, and this objective should be applauded. However, we cannot applaud the way in which the Council has acted, as it has led to a dispute and a twofold dispute at that. The first dispute is institutional, as the Treaties in force do not provide a simple and clear answer as to who should do what in the EU. As a result, there is no clear division of competences between the institutions of the Union and particularly between the Council, the Member States and Parliament. The second level of the dispute concerns the legal basis cited by the Council when making its controversial decision. The Council mistakenly cited the third pillar as the legal basis when the subject matter does not fall under the third pillar but under the competences of the EU in the field of environmental protection. Therefore, the Council did not have the right to make the aforementioned decision. By doing so, it impinged on the competences granted to the Community on the basis of the Community Treaty and infringed the Treaty on European Union, which grants priority to these competences. Furthermore, by choosing an inappropriate legal basis, the Council prevented the European Parliament from having any influence on matters relating to the protection of the environment which, without a doubt, are Community issues and fall within its remit. I am sure that if the European Union had a constitution which set out the competences and defined who does what in the European Union, then this dispute would not be taking place. We would have clear legal guidelines and the European Court of Justice would not be required to intervene."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph