Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-05-06-Speech-3-417"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090506.41.3-417"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, first of all, allow me to say a special ‘thank you’ to all the rapporteurs. I admire very much your commitment and, could I say, perseverance. Maybe it is because I recognise what my husband would call stubbornness in your insisting on these issues being dealt with in this Parliament that I also feel very much at ease and have established excellent cooperation with all of you.
The reports are particularly valuable in deepening our thinking on how the Treaty should work in practice. In their different ways, the five reports all show a strong, self-confident Parliament looking for ways to maximise the potential of the Treaty for improving the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of EU action, to the benefit of voters and citizens.
Mr Dehaene’s report sets out a lot of important detail, and the Commission very widely shares the interpretations it makes of the Treaty. The great strength of the report lies in the clarity with which it shows that implementing the Treaty is not reinforcing one institution at the expense of another – the European Union can only deliver what citizens expect if all Institutions are strong and cooperate effectively.
The report pays particular attention to the issue of transition, and there would have been many advantages in having the Treaty in force before this year of institutional transition. Unfortunately, that has not been possible. So a pragmatic and flexible approach is needed, finding a sensible way forward which will take into account the need to avoid any institutional vacuum this year; the importance of ensuring that the next Commission will enjoy the full authority of a democratic mandate; and the need to respect the role of the Parliament. The Dehaene report sets out a model which will help us all to find the way forward.
Mr Dehaene’s report calls for political and gender balance to be taken into consideration, together with geographical and demographic balance, in the appointment of EU top posts. In today’s Europe, where more than 50% are women, they are still under-represented in politics. This Commission – as you know – has the highest number of women commissioners ever. Still, this is not enough. Improving the gender balance should be an objective when the next Commission is appointed: an objective that can be achieved if there is strong political support from the next Parliament.
I also hope that we will have more women in the European Parliament and in top EU posts. Without them, we all lose out on their knowledge, experience and ideas.
Mrs Guy-Quint’s report tackles another important issue: how to organise the Union’s financial planning cycle for the best use of the EU budget, putting the money where the political priorities are. At a time of intense pressure on public finances, we must have the right procedures in place to deliver best value for money. The balance between stability and responsiveness in budget planning is critical to effective EU planning, and the Commission will return to this in the budget review.
Mr Leinen’s report shows how the Treaty will affect the work of Parliament, and the report covers very thoroughly the implications for Parliament of new policy areas, new powers and new procedures. For example, it underlines the importance of ensuring adequate scrutiny of the Union’s external action, and we are certainly open to identifying the appropriate methods to do so. However, these methods can only be agreed once the Vice-President and High Representative has taken office.
On this, as in many of the other issues raised – including comitology and delegated acts – we look forward to more detailed exchanges with Parliament on implementing all of the issues raised.
Let me turn to the report of Mrs Kaufmann, which explains clearly how the Citizens’ Initiative can bring a new dimension to democracy in the Union. Citizens will be able to call on the Commission to bring forward new policy initiatives. This is one of the areas where the Commission intends to act swiftly once the Treaty is in force – also on the basis of consultation – to understand stakeholders’ and citizens’ expectations. The Commission’s thinking is very much in line with the recommendations of Mrs Kaufmann.
There are, however, a few areas we should discuss further. We want to strike the right balance between a procedure that is easy for citizens and one that means that initiatives will have legitimacy and weight.
A special thanks to those of you who will leave. You have not only been very good collaborators and partners in all of this but also good friends and good sports. Thank you very much. I think, Mrs Kaufmann, that you can be proud of helping to establish what I call establishing and charging the power lines between citizens and the European institutions – new power lines, drawing them up and charging them. I think that is quite something.
For example, on the minimum number of Member States, we should also more closely reflect the type of procedure foreseen in the Treaty.
Finally, Mr Brok’s report covers an area in which both Parliament and the Commission have made important strides in recent years: relations with national parliaments. This Parliament has pioneered the use of inter-parliamentary conferences and has found some very practical ways to build up a real parliamentary network.
The Commission, as you know, has set up a completely new dialogue mechanism with national parliaments, and this is an area where a lot of progress has been made. Since 2006, the Commission has sent to parliaments not only consultation papers, but also legislative proposals, inviting them to respond. So far, we have received and replied to around 400 opinions, and we have also massively increased the number of direct contacts, with more than 500 meetings between Commissioners and national parliamentary bodies since the Commission came into office. So, as the report implies, the Treaty’s new provisions on national parliaments will be fully in tune with the trend of recent years, and I think will reinforce the European parliamentary family still further.
Taken together, these reports illustrate how the Treaty of Lisbon would deepen European democracy and deliver results to European citizens. That is an excellent message for us to take into the European Parliament elections, as well as being an excellent launch pad for preparing for the implementation of the Treaty itself.
I am, of course, delighted d to be able to take part in this debate tonight on the day when the Czech Republic has completed its parliamentary ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. Today’s vote brings to 26 the number of Member States whose parliaments have backed the Treaty. This debate, I think, offers a good opportunity to remind European citizens of the role of the Treaty of Lisbon in delivering a more democratic and coherent European Union.
At a time of economic crisis it is more important than ever to have a Europe that works well, that has the right systems to ensure democracy. The Treaty would give to the EU’s democratic institutions, most obviously this Parliament, the powers they need. It would help the EU to act with greater unity and coherence on the world stage. It would allow Europe to deliver more effectively on the key challenges we face today in areas like climate change and energy security.
The reports we are discussing tonight will also help to ensure that, with the Treaty in place, its implementation will be swifter and smoother.
Good cooperation between the institutions will be critical in securing the maximum benefits from the Treaty, and the Commission is committed to working in partnership with Parliament and the other institutions to make this happen.
The Irish referendum was a sharp reminder of the need to anchor the case for Europe within the national debate. The substantive concerns underlying the vote deserve to be taken seriously – and that was exactly what happened at the European Council last December. The legal guarantees and the decision on the size of the Commission show the respect given by Europe’s political leadership to the result in Ireland and the will to understand the reasons why they voted ‘no’ and respond to those concerns. But it also showed that they remained convinced that this Treaty is right for Europe.
That is also why, since the vote, eight more Member States have concluded their parliamentary proceedings, with eight more ‘yeses’.
Parliament’s reports add up to a comprehensive analysis of key aspects of the Treaty. The underlying approach is to be ambitious for what the Treaty can achieve for the EU – an approach fully shared by the Commission."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples