Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-078"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000705.4.3-078"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, the framework agreement constitutes a degree of progress, but it is also in danger of being a clear retrograde step when it comes to MEPs’ access to information from the Commission. My political Group and the intergroup SOS Democracy therefore recommend that we postpone the vote and give the agreement a proper reading in all committees, especially in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market and the Committee on Budgetary Control. We agree with the criticism from the chairperson of the Committee on Budgetary Control, Mrs Theato, that the agreement directly contravenes Article 276 of the Treaty, which guarantees us access to information as part of the discharge procedure. Now, the Commission is being given the opportunity to decide what it will hand over for inspection. It is the same procedure as applies in connection with the ombudsman. The framework agreement also contravenes our own rules of procedure. Article 64 requires express equality between the Council and Parliament in the legislative procedure when the Commission transfers documents. Now, it is only the President of the Parliament and the committee chairmen who are entitled to see different types of non-public documents. The rapporteurs cannot demand them, and MEPs certainly cannot. As MEPs, we ought to be legally entitled to have documents made available to us whenever they have been issued to others by the Commission. That was something all the group chairmen agreed about when we began negotiations with the Commission. Now, a compromise is being proposed whereby those who are to be inspected can decided what they will have inspected. This compromise does not correspond with Mr Prodi’s pledges. I would therefore urge that we reject the proposal today and arrange for it to be improved so that we can vote for an improved version next time."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph