Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-13-Speech-2-541-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-09-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Annual report on monitoring the application of EU law (2009) - Better legislation, subsidiarity and proportionality and smart regulation - Public access to documents 2009-2010 (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110913.41.2-541-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-09-13-Speech-2-542-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Michael Cashman2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I am going to speak on the Hautala/Sargentini report. The title is interesting. What is better regulation? It is legislation that is clear, precise and that is understood by all participants. Equally, it is legislation that anyone can influence and not just those who have special access and special knowledge. That is why I am pleased to say that the Hautala/Sargentini report is one that I can so easily pick up and replicate in the revision of the regulation on public access to documents. It is much more balanced than the report on 2008. It is realistic. The main point is that transparency is a fundamental right. It is there within the Charter of Fundamental Rights and it is reinforced by the Treaty of Lisbon. Since Lisbon, Regulation No 1049/2001 now applies to all the institutions, the bodies and the agencies set up by them, including the European Court of Justice, the European Investment Bank, etc. The Commission, I believe, has already produced two proposals on my revision. It should now produce a third, and not just maintain the two. It should produce a third based on the work that Parliament has already done. Indeed, in our amendments of 2008, we ‘ ’ the revision of the regulation. So let us work together. We need common rules on classification; we need precise definitions, as Mrs Sommer said earlier, on, for instance, the space to think. If we are to protect the way the institutions function effectively, let us be clear on what the definition is. Let us be clear on the definition of a document. I have to say we do not – the Parliament in its entirety does not – accept the new concept of a document as proposed in the Commission’s previous recasting of Regulation No 1049/2001. We do need common rules on classification of documents because, unless there are common rules, we will never have coherence on access. My time is up. I am pleased to be a part of this debate, but let us prove the debate has worth by revising Regulation No 1049/2001 in compliance with the Hautala/Sargentini report."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	chair; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2009-09-30--2014-06-30)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2009-09-30--2012-03-20)3 member; DEVE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; PETI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Labour Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Lisbonised"1 "Michael Cashman (S&D )."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph