Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-13-Speech-2-285"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071113.31.2-285"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I am glad that another fellow Member will be listening to the discussion, particularly on this issue, in our beautiful language.
It seems to me that we could use political parties here, which are valuable tools. Alas, we are keeping these valuable tools hidden away in our institutional cupboard where they are in danger of getting rusty. Most if not all of us are agreed on the democratic role that political parties should play in Europe, but I think we should also agree that they have not been playing this role as yet. This is because today’s parties, as several speakers have said, are not really political parties. They are loose confederations of parties, as Dimitris Tsatsos, my teacher and rapporteur at the time, said in his report as long ago as 1996. We have no real political parties, and this discussion is a good opportunity for us to see if we can establish real political parties at EU level.
I have two comments on specific topics in the report under discussion. The report makes two significant advances. As we have said, it does not solve all the political problems, but there are two major advances. One is that now we recognise how the political institutions operate, an element of thought comes into our discussion. A vital element of ideological ferment has been introduced. One of the very problems of democracy in the EU is precisely that we do not engage in rigorous and serious political thought, and these institutes can supply this need.
The second major advance is transparency. This is especially evident in the transparency rules laid down for the parties themselves, but above all, I would say, with the new Article 9(b) on the transparency rules for Parliament itself.
Let me conclude with a brief comment on the issue of the fragmentation of the legal basis. I understand that there are technical problems here. Personally, I regret this fragmentation. The point is, if we all agree that from an economic point of view independence and transparency are integral parts of the political mechanism itself, would a single legal mechanism not be far more powerful?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples