Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-07-07-Speech-3-328"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100707.26.3-328"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the vote is approaching and it is time to take stock. On the credit side, the results of the negotiations include your choice of a board of management solution for the service, which will be responsible for advising you. This makes considerably more sense than the structure which was originally planned, with an all-powerful Secretary-General working alone.
A second very positive point is the increase in political accountability. This will improve the quality of the debates in Brussels and in Europe on foreign policy and will help to reduce the democratic deficit a little in this area. For my group, the strong human rights structure is very important and we are pleased about it.
However, there is also a debit side. You have not succeeded in setting up or you were not prepared to set up a permanent political representation which is really worthy of the name. It is true that a solution has been found for the European Parliament but, although we sometimes do not see it like this, the European Parliament is not the world. You will have to be represented in other places – Mallorca and Kiev come to mind – as you have been criticised for not being able to be everywhere at once. I would very much like to have seen you resolving this in a different way.
You have also just said, ‘You will have seen my declaration on the central administration’. My problem is that we have heard two explanations of the concept of central administration. You gave an explanation to the Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper) 48 hours after the agreement in Madrid in which you refer not only to the Council decision of October 2009 but also to Protocol 14 of the Treaty of Lisbon. In my opinion, this explanation conflicts with what was agreed in Madrid. Today, you have given us an explanation, here in front of the elected representatives of the citizens of Europe, which I hope will replace the explanation which you made to the Coreper on 23 June 2010. You cannot talk, on the one hand, about an appropriate structure for crisis management and, on the other, explain to the Coreper that the Crisis Management and Planning Directorate (CMPD) will be solely responsible for this.
My specific question to you is: Does the explanation which you have given here today in the plenary of the European Parliament replace the explanation which you made to the Coreper? Please do not say that there is no contradiction between the two explanations. The contradiction is obvious and anyone who puts the two explanations side by side will identify it immediately. Either there will be an appropriate structure, or you will create something new along the lines of what Mrs Lunacek just said, or we have a problem."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples