Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-117"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020313.6.3-117"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"At first sight the Malmström report on the presentation of the Commission's work programme to the European Parliament offers a pleasing aspect: it actually manages – without saying it in so many words – to erode the college's monopoly on the right of initiative and expose its unilateral and anti-democratic nature to the broad light of day.
On the other hand, however, it omits the essential point: nothing is said about the Council's right to approve this same work programme.
The Malmström report shows firstly that, as the European Parliament becomes more powerful, the Commission's monopoly on the right of initiative weighs increasingly heavy on it. It therefore seeks to impose its own priorities. This desire had, moreover, caused some tension last December when the Commission presented its programme for 2002.
Today, the agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament, which has just been adopted, sets out a timetable for the year n-1 for us to work together to draft the work programme for the year n. This is a good initiative. But it raises a further question: where is the equivalent timetable for a dialogue with the Council?
Such a timetable would be even more justified, and for three reasons: 1) the Council is the European institution with the deepest democratic roots because it is based on national parliaments; 2) theoretically, unlike the European Parliament, it already has real power to push forward and guide the work of the Commission, pursuant to Article 4 of the TEU; 3) finally, the Council has an overview of the work which needs to be done at European level across the three pillars of the Treaty, including the initiatives taken by Member States in the intergovernmental pillar.
In the absence of clarification on this point, the Malmström report appears more than anything to be a manœuvre by the two old connivers, the Commission and the European Parliament, to throw out the primordial rights of the Council."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples