Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-10-08-Speech-3-075"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031008.8.3-075"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have asked to divide my speech into two parts: one now, lasting three minutes, and another lasting two minutes, after the debate.
I would like to speak now about the interinstitutional agreement on ‘Better Law-Making’. This agreement was the result of difficult, lengthy negotiations in which we all asked ourselves – Parliament, the Commission and the Council, but us, above all, I have to say – if it would not be better quietly to give up, given the difficulty of trying to find any real advantages over the current situation.
First of all I would like to thank Mr Gargani, Mr Swoboda and Mr Clegg, with whom we had a good working relationship, as well as the technical group that negotiated with us, for, ultimately, a positive outcome was, in any case, achieved. Therefore, if we are here to urge Parliament to support this agreement, it is because I believe that – albeit minor, tentative – progress has been made.
I would like to focus, in particular, on two issues that I feel are of particular significance: co-regulation and self-regulation. Not so much because the results achieved were ground-breaking but because I believe that, if we use it properly – particularly we in this House – this agreement will make it easier to combat an extremely worrying trend, which I am sorry to say the Commission and the Council seem to endorse, the trend towards alternative methods of regulation to legislation, and here I am referring, in particular, to what are known as voluntary agreements. Recent experience in the field of road safety and CO2 in cars has shown us that the risks of not achieving objectives, in terms of effectiveness and enforcement across the board, which a normal law could have achieved, are very real where these voluntary agreements are used. It is precisely in response to this potential danger that we have become extensively involved in this difficult debate, which included many other elements too – as Members will be able to see if they read the text, there is also a lot of waffle – but, at least, on the issues of self-regulation and co-regulation, some minor progress has been achieved.
We must, however, fully admit to defeat in one area: we did not succeed in getting the right of call-back from the Commission – the right to suspend the use of a voluntary agreement if we do not approve of it. We are extremely disappointed about this because it was the Commission – and this has to be said – that did not want to step down on this point. We have simply obtained a political willingness from the Commission to take unambiguous, clear opposition from Parliament into consideration. If it is deemed necessary, it will, therefore, be up to Parliament to organise opposition to the voluntary agreement in order to force the Commission to recall it itself.
One last thing, Mr President: the difficulty that the Commission and the Council have in going further in this area seems to be exactly the same as that we encountered in the negotiations on comitology, which we hope has been overcome once and for all thanks to the agreements concluded by the Convention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples