Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-258"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991117.7.3-258"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am delighted to make this point of order in the presence of the Commission and the Council, because the issue in question is particularly serious. At 5 p.m. today, a text signed by Mr Barón Crespo and some of his accomplices requested that the debate on the Napolitano report that was due to take place at 7 p.m. should be postponed until tomorrow. It was asked, in the form of a topical and urgent motion, that a debate tabled for 8 p.m. this evening should be postponed until tomorrow morning. Kindly explain to us the reason for this urgency. Furthermore, this request was formulated according to Rule 112 of our Rules of Procedure which refers back to article 60 whereas Mr Napolitano’s report, as it is quite clearly stated in the legal grounds of the aforementioned report, is a report which is covered by article 181, since it concerns the internal Rules of Procedure of our Parliament. It is therefore not a legislative proposal or an assimilated text at all, as the justification made by Mr Barón Crespo claims.
Mr Barón Crespo has accustomed Parliament to his Stalinist methods, to this Soviet way of treating Parliament for fifteen years. What we want, apart from any fundamental issue that we will address tomorrow, is to try to enlighten MEPs about a mistake that has been made, so that we do not continue to make this mistake. We are driving ourselves into a dead end by flouting MEPs’ prerogatives, by flouting the European Union’s history of parliamentarianism and that of all its Member States. And because we do not want to rectify mistakes that we made six months ago, we are prepared to institutionalise informing within our Parliament, which allows any assistant or official in Parliament to inform on someone because he suspects that so and so’s brother-in-law’s cousin may have committed fraud! It is absolutely scandalous! I request that this decision by Parliament be revoked. It is unacceptable. I request, in accordance with article 115, that the debate be included in the agenda 24 hours after the different versions have been made available to MEPs, that is, not before mid-day tomorrow."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples