Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-157"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.5.2-157"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I have voted against the report because I believe that the rapporteur has exceeded the competences conferred on the European Parliament by the Treaties, and is seeking, through interpretive methods with which I do not agree, to increase the number and the volume of dossiers that will be subject to consultation.
In fact, my interpretation of Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union diverges from the one put forward in this report, and I believe that the words ‘... main aspects and... basic choices’ of common foreign and security policy must not be understood to be ‘practical agreements’ and ‘specific countries’, however wide-ranging the agreements or however important our counterpart might be.
The assumption that the silence of the law lays down a specific obligation for the Council and that this supposed specific obligation results in a general rule laying down the obligation to consult Parliament is an interpretation with which I clearly cannot agree.
I believe that the attempt to impose the State model at Community level does not reflect the current State of the Union. There is no basis for attempting to give the European Parliament competences similar to those of a national Parliament.
Most particularly, I regret the fact that the original proposal for a recommendation should have been replaced by quite aggressive initiatives, which do nothing to encourage the signing of the EU-US agreements that are the basis for this recommendation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples