Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-13-Speech-2-552-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110913.41.2-552-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, honourable Members, the debate on better legislation was about three issues. However, they were related to each other, because they were all about making better laws, so the debate was about three questions which were only different at first glance. All the comments which I have been honoured to hear were extremely interesting and will certainly be taken into account in the work of the Council of the European Union.
I would like to refer to those three issues – the issues which were the subject of today’s debate. I will begin with the question of access to information. I do, of course, share your fears concerning excessive limitations to access, and I agree with your expectations about making the European Union as transparent as possible. However, it should be remembered that we have to find a balance between transparency in terms of the functioning of the European institutions and the efficiency of their work. I agree fully here with the remarks of Ms Sommer, who highlighted precisely this need to ensure efficiency. It is obvious – and this has been admitted, too, by the Court of Justice of the European Union in its jurisprudence – that not all documents must be made publicly accessible. As an example, I can cite the question of documents forwarded to the Council by the Member States. If we made the documents we receive from the Member States available in full, the Member States would stop sending them, which would, in turn, affect the efficiency of the Council of the European Union and its work. If we are talking about access to documents, I think we should also concentrate on improving access to documents which are not classified as sensitive. Mr Jong rightly pointed out that often, the Internet sites of individual institutions are so unclear that even documents to which there is full access are very difficult for the citizens to find.
Finally, I fully agree with the conclusion of the Vice-President of the European Commission, Mr Šefčovič, concerning the need to accelerate work on the proposal to recast Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and bring this piece of European legislation into line with the Treaty of Lisbon. As for questions concerning better legislation, there is no doubt – and we are all agreed about this – that a definitive reduction should be made in administrative burdens, chiefly in relation to businesses and against the background of the economic crisis. Stimulating economic growth must be treated as a chance for the Union to get on track for greater and significant economic growth. In this context, I very much agree with Mr Karim’s report.
Mr Rangel drew attention to the question of public consultations, and also to the enhanced role of national parliaments which was introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon. From the Council’s point of view, this is something which is extremely important. It is not only a matter, here, of increasing the legitimacy of what the European Union does by increasing the role of national parliaments, because we must also remember that it is the national parliaments which implement the European legislation we adopt. The earlier we involve the national parliaments in the process of making European Union law, the better will be the results we can expect in terms of the process of implementing that law in each Member State.
I would also like to refer to the question of correlation tables. We think there is a chance of reaching agreement, here. I would like to thank Mr Šefčovič for his contribution. I think that in the course of the next few weeks, we will be able to reach agreement on this.
I will make reference to yet one last thing, which is, in principle, the responsibility of the Commission, I mean the application and maintenance of the application of EU law by the Member States. I would just like to add that of course, this House has often pointed to the role of the infringement procedure, in which the Commission brings an action against a Member State in the Court of Justice. Let us remember, however, that the aim of this procedure is not to censure the Member State, but to induce it to implement European Union law correctly. In this context, programmes such as the EU Pilot initiative or the Solvit network are of very great importance. They are also being put into effect with the help of the Member States. The fact that it is possible to bring an end to many infringements before proceedings are instituted is also due to the Member States. Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to thank you all once again for an extremely interesting debate."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples