Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-03-Speech-4-085"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010503.5.4-085"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We have voted against the report “Public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents” because despite its promising title, it seeks less to extend opportunities for access than to regulate them and thereby give the institutions the right to restrict public access. The institutions concerned would actually retain the right to class as ‘confidential’ documents in fields as diverse as “defence and military matters, international relations, economic, financial or monetary policy and public security” as well as “documents concerning court proceedings, inspections, investigations or financial audits”. In other words, more or less everything can be classified as secret.
There would appear to be even less public access to the documents of the European institutions than is permitted in some Member States. In this field, as in many others, the least we should do is to narrow the gap between the least anti-democratic practices and those which are most transparent.
The fact of the matter, however, is that there is no reason for any document from the European institutions to be concealed from the public. We are in favour of the full publication of every document, every agreement and every treaty, as well as parts of all the speeches that are today made behind closed doors, of all the dealings kept secret and all the lobbying, which have led Parliament, the Council or the European Commission to take a decision or issue a directive."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples