Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-25-Speech-4-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030925.4.4-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Perry has drafted a report and has presented certain elements of the Lloyd’s case to us. The Commissioner has given us a series of enlightening explanations today which are indeed valuable. And Mr Cashman contests Mr Perry's information. What emerges from this? That our concern at this moment in time is not the substance of the matter, nor are we a court. Our concern at this moment in time is this, and only this: after five years of reports, we want to maintain the credibility of our committee and, consequently, our problem is whether we shall receive a definitive answer as to the extent to which the directive was or was not applied. That is our only concern.
I am seizing this opportunity to generalise this concern, because today we had the reports from the Ombudsman and the Committee on Petitions. The Lloyd’s issue came to the Committee on Petitions with petitions from citizens. The Ombudsman was also involved, as the Commissioner said, in the issue of the extent to which the Commission did its job properly. And, of course, it is a question of the application of Community law.
What emerges from this? That the two twin rights, of accusation and petition, are interlinked. They should not therefore be debated separately. Secondly, with these two reports, the whole issue of the proper application of Community law is involved; in other words, the extent to which this report should also be jointly debated today. I therefore propose to Parliament, the Commission and my honourable friends that we look at the possibility of examining these reports jointly because, materially, they are the only reports which directly concern the European citizen. As, therefore, we are all interested in reinforcing the participation of the European citizen, I think we should give some emphasis to this debate and I even think that we should declare the day of the debate in Parliament to be the day of the European citizen. Thus, we shall be reliable and we shall say that we really are interested in their rights.
Now, what we are calling for, after five years, is a clear picture at least of what is going on. So what we want is to obtain this clear picture in a short space of time because Mr Cashman may in fact be right. However, we do not know at this moment who is right. And the Commission has indeed been neglectful. Thus, I shall raise the more general concern. The Committee on Petitions often delays its final conclusions because we have a time-consuming procedure on the part of the Commission on the question of petitions. Could it not shorten this period of time so that we too are more credible in the eyes of the European citizens who come and say to us, it has been eighteen months and we have not had a reply? These are the more general concerns that are being aired in today's debate and I think it is a golden opportunity for us to use them in the interest, naturally, of the European Union, but more importantly, for us to give European citizens to understand that we stand by them."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples