Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-11-20-Speech-4-055"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-11-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Investigations conducted by the European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20081120.4.4-055"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-11-20-Speech-4-0562
lpv:speaker	lp:Jorgo Chatzimarkakis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Freie Demokratische Partei - Die Liberalen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ECON (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; CONT (2007-02-12--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AGRI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; ITRE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Commissioner Kallas, I would like to start by congratulating the rapporteur warmly. She has put in a huge amount of hard work, which is a rare occurrence these days. OLAF is a very special body within the EU: an independent anti-corruption agency which is the envy of other international organisations. It was this Parliament – as explained by Mr Bösch and Mr Rübig – which, following bad experiences with OLAF's predecessor, insisted on the independence of the new Anti-Fraud Office. We should remember that, at the time, OLAF was only allocated or linked to the Commission for practical reasons. Unfortunately, for many people the memories of the scandals of 1999 have already faded, along with any respect for the necessary independence of an anti-corruption authority. From today's perspective, the existing safeguards are no longer sufficient to protect OLAF from the exertion of influence and, above all, from increasing blockades. Let us be clear about one thing right from the start: OLAF is there to combat fraud. It is a body which ensures that taxpayers' money is used appropriately. Therefore there are five points which we are supporting by means of this report to promote OLAF's independence: Firstly, the right of the General Director to intervene in cases heard by the European Court of Justice. This right ensures that OLAF can consistently defend the results of its investigations. The second important guarantee is the right of the supervisory committee, the Commission or another body to bring a case before the European Court of Justice if OLAF's independence is jeopardised. This sharp sword is necessary because warnings from the supervisory committee have simply been ignored in the past. Thirdly, OLAF's independence is also guaranteed by its obligation to bring before the courts the facts of a case which could constitute the elements of a crime. The fourth point is the importance of the skills and strength of character of the people responsible. Fifthly, I am pleased that the Director General of OLAF is being reappointed. Experience and performance are both important here. We should try to avoid denigrating OLAF. The experiences of other anti-corruption authorities show that this does not help anyone. However, I do agree fully with Mr Bösch that the Council must be involved. No French or Czech explanation for this is forthcoming. They are not even present and in the end the system simply cannot work like this."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph