Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-11-Speech-3-046"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091111.13.3-046"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to comment briefly on some of the issues that were directly put during the debate.
That being said, it is important to work on a partnership basis in order to strengthen the European institutions. If we do not have institutions that work, what will happen? The Member States – especially some Member States – will tend to take their own decisions outside of the institutions. Is that what we want? I do not think so. We want decisions to be taken within the institutional framework, within the framework of a Community based on the rule of law, and this is what I would like to say to you very frankly and very sincerely: let us mutually strengthen our institutions.
We have heard today the extraordinary plea made by Václav Havel. It is extraordinary, but as Jean Monnet said, nothing is possible without men; nothing is lasting without institutions. We now need to put in place strong institutions, and that can only be done in this spirit of partnership. That is why, among other things, I wish to thank you for your suggestions concerning the organisation and structure of the Commission. Like you, I am very attached to the Community method and to the treaty, which provides for a clear division of responsibilities. Under the treaty, the responsibility for the organisation of the Commission falls to its President, and I have no intention of renouncing it.
Therefore, when I present the Commission, I will do what all modest authors do: I will thank all those who advised me, while assuming full responsibility for the final product. Today, I have heard some good and interesting suggestions, but the crucial point to understand is this: each of us must exercise his or her responsibilities coherently with the other institutions, while showing, of course, the greatest possible consideration for the European general interest.
First of all, regarding climate change, let us be clear. The European Union is committed to a binding treaty. We have been committed to the Kyoto Protocol and have ratified it. All of our Member States have ratified Kyoto, and we are in favour of a binding treaty for the future. If there is anyone who does not want a binding treaty, it is not the European Union.
But the reality is that some of our most important partners are simply not ready for it, so there are two possibilities. One is to insist on something that we know is not going to work, another is to try to have the most advanced and ambitious outcome at Copenhagen. I believe it is still possible, and we will fight for it. To have the most ambitious possible agreement at Copenhagen and – at least for the European Commission, and I am sure the Heads of State or Government agree – we will remain committed to a binding treaty that sets clear targets for the developed countries and clear actions for the developing countries, including the fast-growing, big emerging economies that also have a responsibility to share. We also need to provide funding to the developing countries – especially the poorest and the least developed countries – because we know very well that, without that support, they will not be able to make the adaptation and mitigation efforts that are needed.
With regard to the institutional question, let us be totally honest with ourselves. We are now on the eve of the entry into force of a new system that is extremely demanding.
Most of us have fought hard to have this treaty, over many years, at least nine years! After Nice, we wanted a more ambitious treaty, and now we must implement it. It is complex, because our Union is complex – it is a Union of Member States, a Union of citizens.
The most important thing, however, is precisely respect for the treaties. We are a Community based on the rule of law, and the day that we fail to honour our commitment to show full respect for the treaty will definitely be the day that we fail in our duties.
That is why it is crucial in this transition – and when the new treaty is implemented – that respect be shown for the treaties and for the powers of each institution: the powers of Parliament, of course, the powers of the Council, and the powers of the Commission.
I myself am one of those who believe that Europe stands still when one institution uses its power and its authority against the others. I believe that it is a mistake to act in that way. I believe that institutional jealousy is a characteristic shared by mediocre individuals. On the contrary, I believe that we will be stronger if we strengthen one another. I believe that it is entirely in our interests to have a strong European Parliament – and the Treaty of Lisbon gives it increased powers – but also to have a European Council with a consistent and coherent leadership over time, and a strong Commission.
Moreover, in accordance with the treaties, and I cite the Treaty of Lisbon – because we talk about it all the time, but we need to read it sometimes too – Article 17 of which states that it is the Commission that ‘shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end. It shall ensure the application of the treaties, and of measures adopted by the institutions pursuant to them.’ In other words, it is the Commission’s job to verify whether or not the treaties have been applied, including during this transition. This is a power that the treaty gives to the Commission and which the Commission will, of course, exercise within the scope of its responsibilities."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples