Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-27-Speech-3-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020227.4.3-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, a complaint and three messages. The complaint is that we are experts in devaluing important debates. This is the most important debate in terms of the European Parliament’s work over the next year and we are dealing with it as if it were a question of procedure and a rubber-stamping debate. I believe that this is absurd and things should not be done in this way.
As for the messages; firstly, I would address the Commission. Mr President of the Commission, in December we criticised you, but now we must welcome the Commission’s efforts and I am quite happy to say that the Vice-President, Mrs de Palacio, has actively contributed to our reaching an agreement which makes it possible for there to be a legislative programme and a work programme. Please carry on in this way.
Specifically, you have asked us to support you in relation to having more civil servants and more resources in order to deal with enlargement. I would remind you that Parliament already indicated in Agenda 2000 that enlargement could not take place without amending the forecasts for 2000. You have added Afghanistan and other priorities. The Council should be hearing this because it is the Council which is most intransigent. No representative of the Council is present. I have noticed that Mr Poettering, in a display of generosity, has not applied the Poettering doctrine; I imagine that if the Secretary of State comes, he will apply it; he will say that it should be a Minister. But, in any event, it is important that the Council should also hear this message from the Commission. You have our support.
Mr President, I am not going to go into detail on each of the issues because they are all very important and there is a degree of convergence. I will make a final point. In relation to the Convention, we are in agreement; I also welcome the fact that you said it was a joint initiative of Parliament and the Commission. This morning I read some headlines in a prominent Italian newspaper which said that it had been you alone. I am delighted that you have countered what the Italian press has said by pointing out that it has been a joint effort.
Mr President, Parliament wanted something like the Convention before the Charter of Fundamental Rights. It wanted it afterwards and it wants it now. I believe this is very important.
Mr President of the Commission, you are the guardians of the Treaties, and my specific question is, are you prepared to exercise your powers of initiative in the Convention in order to preserve and strengthen the Community method?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples