Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-05-Speech-4-200"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-06-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Relations with the complainant in infringements of Community law2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030605.5.4-200"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-06-05-Speech-4-2012
lpv:speaker	lp:Margot Kessler2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PETI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I should like to congratulate Mrs Fourtou on her report and to thank her. My group is of the opinion that the Commission communication is a step in the right direction, since it recognises how important the role of complainant is in the exposure of infringements of Community law. The Commission must welcome the citizen as the provider of a service, and must look after citizens’ interests. Only in this way is trust created, and the feeling conveyed that the EU is a Union for its citizens. The citizen must always be shown ways in which he can assert his rights as a citizen of the Union. This must also apply to the Commission even if it turns out that the Commission is for once not the right body to which to turn with a complaint. The citizen must have the feeling that this is what Europe is, and I say Europe because we must remember that many citizens do not make any distinction between the institutions. The citizen must therefore be given an answer. Therefore I particularly welcome the fact that this communication includes this aspect. I would have liked the wording to be more clear, however, in particular by stating that the Commission must in all cases show the complainant an alternative means of recourse to law. Citizens must be dealt with and informed individually and personally. The Commission must inform the complainant immediately and consistently. Here it is also important that the complainant really does have the opportunity to present his complaint to the Commission in person and to explain it in more detail. The good intentions of the communication must now be put into practice and must not be allowed to remain merely a theory on paper. Like the rapporteur, I too am basically of the opinion that the one-year time limit for processing complaints is sufficient. That means, however, that the one-year time limit must be the rule and that the citizen is able to rely on really obtaining an answer within one year. I do not believe the excuse that the Commission does not have enough staff in order to do this to be a valid one. Like Mrs Fourtou, I regret the fact that the communication did not make any connection with the petition procedure. For years the Committee on Petitions has been demanding intensified inter-institutional cooperation. This has already been referred to in the Perry-Keßler report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph