Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-03-Speech-1-118"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-09-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Monitoring application of Community law (1999)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010903.8.1-118"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-09-03-Speech-1-1192
lpv:speaker	lp:Astrid Thors2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-13--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Svenska folkpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; PETI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (1999-09-13--2002-01-14)3 member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 member_of_the_bureau; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, our debate today is somewhat absurd. After we had prepared the report, two important documents came from the Commission. I am thinking firstly of the White Paper on governance and secondly of the communication on the Information and Communication Policy. Having studied these documents, I am quite confused about the way in which the Commission intends to help us supervise the application of Community law and about how it intends to prioritise the issues concerned. Where, firstly, the Information and Communication Policy is concerned, the communication says that the future of what is known as the European justice system is in the process of being looked into. In sharp contrast to what is stated in the communication, we in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market had been given to understand that this network of specialised lawyers, which can provide people with advice and which operates at the Commission’s delegations in the Member States, was viewed as valuable by the Commission. The June communication now tells us that the Commission is considering how the system is to look in the future and that the tasks of the lawyers concerned are perhaps to be transferred to national administrations. Who, I should like to ask the Commission, believes that a national administration will help people obtain justice from the self-same administration? Secondly, I am confused about the fact that, according to the White Paper on governance, there is a desire for ‘networks of similar existing bodies in the Member States capable of dealing with disputes involving citizens and EU issues’, at the same time as an intention to improve people’s knowledge of their rights under Community law. How does the Commission intend that we should monitor the application of Community law? I believe that we need to do some serious thinking, and I think that the Commission could have been more practical when it came to how this very issue was dealt with in the White Paper."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph