Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-13-Speech-2-580-500"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110913.42.2-580-500"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"The Committee on Petitions’ repeated calls to be kept informed of the progress of infringement proceedings relating to open petitions remain unanswered in most cases. Petitioners contact their local MEPs in order to follow their petition and it is embarrassing and simply not acceptable that we cannot inform them of the status of their petitions. Therefore, paragraph 24 is particularly welcome and pertinent. The Commission also needs to be forthcoming regarding the progress of their investigations, upon initial examination of a petition (which usually takes six to eight months); neither the MEP nor the petitioners receive any feedback on what are usually very urgent matters. A sense of urgency needs to be adopted by the Commission. I would like to draw attention to Recital L: 40% of petitions received are inadmissible; we need to work to raise citizens’ awareness of petitions. Confusion remains on the different EU and national competences, as well as those of the EU institutions, in particular, the European Court of Human Rights. Petitioners are often unsure of what exactly constitutes an admissible petition. As petitions are the earliest indications that Member States are lagging behind in implementing EU law, the Commission must recognise the role and crucial importance of petitions in monitoring the effective implementation of EU law."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples