Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-11-Speech-1-094-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120611.20.1-094-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I would like to echo the words of Róża Thun und Hohenstein, whom I would also like to thank for her cooperation on a topic which, in my view, touches on the essence of the so-called democratic deficit of the European Union. It involves nothing less than the way in which European institutions communicate with European citizens and involve them in the decision-making process and the formation of European policies.
Positive steps can certainly be found, such as the European Citizens’ Initiative, for example. However, if we are talking about public consultations as a way of involving ordinary citizens, smaller non-profit organisations or public bodies, the Commission’s efforts are, in fact, inadequate and merely formal, if we value the voices of ordinary citizens and not just the large organised interest groups.
The public consultations are normally published mainly just in English, are too complicated and, most importantly, most citizens know nothing at all about the possibility of commenting on emerging legislation. Is it really enough for a highly technical document running into dozens of pages to be displayed for a few weeks somewhere on the Commission website, and then to regard the aim of involving citizens – which is a fundamental element of direct democracy in the EU – as having been achieved? I firmly believe that this is wrong, and I am backed up in this by easily obtainable figures. The Single Market Act is considered to be one of the most important documents on the future of the Single Market. According to Commission figures, during the four-month consultation period, a grand total of 248 citizens from the entire EU commented on it in the public consultations.
What was the outcome of this consultation? Dialogue with civil society was the category identified by citizens as the most important of all the 50 priority actions put forward by the Commission. This is natural, because it is the citizens who will be directly affected by the resulting legislation.
A call for better communications was also made at last year’s Single Market Forum in Kraków, where the public was able to participate actively in the debate on the future of the Single Market. What is the situation today, on 11 June 2012? The Commission has so far offered 23 public consultations. It could be said that their only common denominator was the English language. In respect of other criteria they varied. Some involved filling in questionnaires, while in others, the citizens had to write their comments in emails. They varied in the scope of the accompanying documents (again mainly in English), the period for which the consultations were open, their graphics and so on.
I firmly believe that by making public consultations available in all of the official languages, improving accessibility and intelligibility and unifying the rules, we will achieve the greater corresponding participation, which, in my opinion, the consultations deserve. I consider this to be a step not only towards greater transparency in the decision-making process, but also towards strengthening fundamental civic rights in the EU. It would also be a nice gift from the Commission for the forthcoming European Year of Citizens."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples