Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-10-Speech-1-070"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020610.4.1-070"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to say to Mr Duff that I am one of those conservative people, although I belong to neither the Group of the Party of European Socialists nor the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats.
My group was quick to express great doubts about the need for revision of the Rules of Procedure which goes beyond the reforms necessary after Nice, and we raised sincere objections to the method which has changed this report from a report introducing minor changes to a report based on Mr Corbett’s creativity more than a genuine need. Indeed, I would remind you by way of context that very many of the reforms which he himself, moreoever, has introduced in past years have not been implemented, notably the legislation on the Commission’s powers. Mindful of this, we have worked quickly to avoid any of his main proposals subsequently being adopted by the House. We will see what happens tomorrow. Indeed, I defy anybody, Mr President, to predict what will happen during the vote tomorrow as things stand, for these reforms are, as I said, extremely wide-ranging and incoherent.
I would like to raise two very brief points if I may, Mr President. First of all, we objected strongly to the idea of a quantitative rather than a qualitative approach, deciding what to deal with in plenary and what to refer back to committee purely on the basis of the number of amendments or the number of votes cast for and against.
The truth of the matter, as things stand in Parliament, is that all those lengthy, tedious voting sessions are essentially the result of poor preparation in committee. The committees that do their work properly are those which are able, under the current system, to keep voting time to a minimum and to put just a few genuinely important points to the vote in plenary; those which do not succeed in doing this are precisely those committees which cause us to waste time.
Furthermore, we are extremely sceptical as regards the option of referring reports back to committee, of letting the committees make the decisions in the cases stipulated by the Corbett report. We are concerned for the simple reason that Parliamentary committees do not always reflect the views of the majority of Parliament, and we would be in very great danger of ending up with conflicting resolutions with conflicting content.
I would like to have said a lot more but my time is running out. I would, in any case, like to thank Mr Corbett for his work – despite the fact that he has not listened to most of my speech!"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples