Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-13-Speech-2-088"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000613.10.2-088"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, anyone who follows this debate will see that there is a kind of war going on between those who are trying to protect health and those who defend tobacco. However, as Mrs Grossetête has pointed out, the problem stems from the fact that legal arguments have been given and that, by a small majority, the Committee on Legal Affairs decided that Article 95 was not the appropriate legal basis.
As a Socialist member and spokesperson in the Legal Affairs Committee, I would like to reiterate the objection to this point of view. Article 95 is the article which takes up the former Article 100A of the Treaty, on the basis of which the three previous directives, which are now being remodelled in this new directive, had been adopted. Therefore, to reject that legal basis now is to go against our previous tradition, to cast doubt upon what we had done, which seems to me to be above all very dangerous for the construction of a European legal system.
To speak of subsidiarity in this area, an area strictly relating to the internal market, which specifically involves the health of the citizens, regulated by Article 95, is a way of diverting the battle and, in my view, this is very dangerous because, while the defence of an economic sector seems to me to be important, and worthy of respect, it must not lead this Parliament to change the legal basis or, as is intended for example in another amendment, to suspend any decisions until the decision of the Court of Justice on the directive on tobacco advertising is adopted. This directive which we are discussing today has nothing to do with the directive on tobacco advertising.
Therefore, Mr President, I believe that we must be consistent, maintain our previous attitude in this respect, maintain the legal basis proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the Legal Services of the three institutions and refuse to accept this abuse of the subsidiarity theory which would truly put an end to the existence of the European Union and the competences of this Parliament."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples