Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-12-Speech-3-200"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051012.18.3-200"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, quality is the central part of the strategy if we really want to make a difference and I am glad that we are going to speak again about education and quality.
Recommendation E on licensing and funding is deleted. International reputation enhancement is added. I welcome this. We consider that deletion of the licensing and funding purpose in the text does not exclude that national authorities may use foreign assessments as a basis for funding and licensing decisions.
The compromise text supports the main thrust of the Commission’s proposal. The Commission can accept the amendments. Implementation of the recommendation will help to make quality assurance in Europe more coherent and more effective. I therefore hope that the recommendation can be adopted at first reading.
I would also like to stress the remarkable work done by Mrs Novak in close collaboration with the Commission and the Council. This work has allowed us to come to an excellent result today.
Exactly one year ago, on 12 October 2004, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council and Parliament recommendation on further European cooperation and quality assurance in higher education. This proposal is based on the results of the 1998 Council recommendation, so we are just continuing to work towards the goals agreed between the Member States.
The main aim of this proposal is to facilitate the mutual recognition of quality assurance assessments across the European Union and in this way to achieve easy recognition of qualifications and easier mobility for citizens. It means allowing citizens to move with their rights and capabilities, not only as tourists within the Union.
The Commission’s proposal has been the subject of many fruitful debates in ECOSOC, in the Council education committee and in the Committee on Culture and Education of this Parliament. Discussions between the British Presidency, Parliament and the Commission have led to a set of compromise amendments which are the subject of your debate and vote during this part-session.
The Commission can accept all amendments proposed in the compromise text. I will illustrate some of them and the Commission’s position by referring to the most important amendments.
We welcome the new recital referring to the Bergen communiqué. We believe it supports coherence between EU and Bologna quality activities. This is in our common interest, given the fact that Bologna signatory states and EU Member States are the same countries. We now have 45 countries in the Bologna process.
On recommendation B on higher education sector involvement, diversity and innovation, we also welcome the reference to the involvement of the higher education sector in the further development of quality standards and guidelines and the reference to the need to protect and promote diversity and innovation.
As regards recommendation C and point 1 of the Annex on the European Register, the amendments stress the role of the national authorities in the setting-up of a European register of quality assurance agencies. The amendments reflect the responsibility of public authorities for the national quality assurance systems.
Recommendation D is about universities’ choice of agency. This recommendation calls on Member States to enable higher education institutions to choose an agency from the register which meets their needs and profile. The amendment makes this freedom of choice conditional on permission given by national authorities. I am happy that the principle of free choice remains in the text because it is important."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples