Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-06-Speech-4-028"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-07-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Committee on Petitions – European Ombudsman2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000706.3.4-028"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-07-06-Speech-4-0292
lpv:speaker	lp:Ioannis Koukiadis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PETI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 member; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-09-13--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I should like to start by congratulating the two rapporteurs on their interesting comments. With its ever widening circle of activities, covering a broad range of citizens' interests, the European Union is turning into a modern Leviathan, complete with the inevitable high-handedness which accompanies every administrative mechanism; from certain points of view, it is becoming even more dangerous than the equivalent national government services. That is because control mechanisms have not kept pace with the increase in activities. There are three ways of blocking the dangers which result from this extensive administrative mechanism in the European Union. The first is to have more direct and more frequent involvement by European Parliament in controlling the individual activities of the institutions of the European Union. The proposal by the rapporteur, Mrs Thors, that the Commission include a section on reports and complaints in the annual report on Community law and the proposed organisational agreement making it easier for complaints to be examined quickly need to be followed up here. If the tenet of these proposals is extrapolated, the suggestion is that the European Parliament should, in the future, devote more time to these matters, which are equally important if it is to enhance its status and its right to aspire to codecision with the Council. In more general terms, it is time to see parliamentary control exercised on a different footing. The second way is to introduce the European Charter of Fundamental Rights as a binding charter guaranteeing European citizens immediate rights, both adjectival and substantive, which protect their interests fairly and which convert to the right to compensation in the event that their interests are attacked. The increasingly likely prospect of a Charter which amounts to no more than a declaration will obviously damage the credibility of the European Union which, while abundantly eloquent on the importance of transparency in the operation of its institutions as a basic policy objective and accessibility to European citizens as a basic factor in achieving it, shies from recognising the rudimentary mechanism needed in order to achieve these objectives. The third way is to strengthen and improve the role of the ombudsman, mainly by giving him easier access to all the documents needed in order to conduct an efficient investigation. At the same time, the wealth of material in his report should be closely studied and taken as the starting point for the changes which need to be made to the modus operandi of the Community institutions. I wish the ombudsman courage and good luck for the future."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph