Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-014"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.2.2-014"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Mr Prodi, I am very pleased that we have another opportunity today to discuss the White Paper together, because European governance is indeed a pivotal theme and I would like to make it very clear that I believe that the whole future viability of the European Union depends to a large extent on this issue. I am bound to agree with Mr Voggenhuber on this point: as far as I am concerned, the issue at the centre of the whole debate around governance is the question of democracy – strengthening democracy and above all strengthening the public's rights, especially under the Charter of Fundamental Rights. I say that because one thing is clear: the very best policy will achieve nothing if it does not impact on the public or if the present state of affairs continues, in which the public believes that what happens in Brussels is far removed from them and their day-to-day concerns.
I believe, Mr Prodi, that the public quite rightly expects two things: the first is transparency in decision making and the second is clarity as regards political responsibility for decisions. I believe that this has to be the focal point from which our joint deliberations start, both for the Commission and of course also for the other institutions. I would like to talk about transparency for a moment. The White Paper talks about a cumbersome system of almost 700 consultative bodies supporting the Commission. If I remember correctly, you yourself picked up this point in the White Paper on the reform of the Commission, and announced back in June that a list of these consultative bodies would be published. In the White Paper before us, you promise that details of these bodies will be published by the end of the year. I am very much in favour of that. This is a question of transparency, and it could help to remove some of the prejudice against the work of the Commission and the other institutions. However, publishing details of consultative bodies is one thing, and, as I see it, accepting political responsibility for decisions is quite another.
A second point in the White Paper that I would like to mention is the ‘culture of consultation and dialogue’. I certainly regard that as a very good proposal. I think that the Commission on the one hand and the Council and Parliament on the other would be well advised to jointly consider how a new culture of consultation and dialogue can be achieved in terms of greater involvement for civil society. I think it would be better if the Commission did not propose a code of conduct on minimum standards for consultation for itself, but rather if we could jointly consider whether there is not some scope for all three institutions to make a joint commitment under an Interinstitutional Agreement. You spoke earlier about a dialogue of this kind, about the possibility of setting up a working party, and I am keen to accept that suggestion."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples