Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-10-25-Speech-4-389-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121025.29.4-389-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
". − Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this report today is an assessment of what is now a significant part of European economic governance.
I would like to thank the group rapporteurs, with whom I was able − and this is not just words − to undertake genuine constructive work. I believe that this report, taken overall, reflects the concerns of everyone, even if not all have been taken up in a strict sense.
This report was also undertaken in close cooperation with the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, in accordance with Rule 50, which explains why the report takes up a number of provisions in their entirety, without a vote, so as to properly respect those rules and the ideas of that committee; the rules prevailed.
I am not going to list the various points we are emphasising in terms of the Semester content; I would rather talk about what concerned us the most, namely the method. The Semester is, as I was saying, a very important element in establishing coordination of States’ economic and financial policies and involves both European and national levels. That is already something new.
In fact, while the Commission’s proposals must next be validated by the Council before being reflected, as far as possible, in national budgets, there is a need, in terms of democratic control, for sound understanding and proper coordination with national parliaments. In this regard, we know − and I do not think anyone will mind me saying − that some of our national parliaments do not fully understand Community Mechanisms and there is a certain apprehension when they see the European level take precedence over national level. That is why some, quite legitimately, assert that national sovereignty entitles them to adopt the budget they want and that they do not have to obey instructions or orders from elsewhere.
There is, therefore, undoubtedly work to be done to educate and explain. Indeed, a meeting was recently held in Brussels with the representatives of the financial or economic committees of the national parliaments to explain this European Semester. I had the opportunity, as rapporteur, to say that MEPs have no intention whatsoever of interfering in national relations or the working of national parliaments and that, in reality, the European Parliament and national parliaments have a specific task, that of providing democratic control at their level.
I think that in future such meetings will have to be repeated to encourage understanding of the system and its proper application. In this regard, it would certainly be a good thing for these meetings, currently organised in a fairly ad hoc way, to be more formal and, in particular, for those attending the meetings to be able to do so regularly, so that genuine dialogue may be established between national parliaments and the European Parliament.
On issues of method, we also stress the need, for instance, for recommendations to be more explicit so that outcomes may be evaluated and, if necessary, corrected.
Lastly, I will add that it is also important for States to meet the commitments they have themselves made. It seems an obvious thing to say but, unfortunately, the opposite is often seen."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples