Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-318"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060117.23.2-318"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the aim of the present proposal for a regulation is to create greater transparency by means of increased public participation in the drafting of legislative texts, something which I very much welcome.
We MEPs are dependent on receiving information from associations, organisations, non-governmental organisations and interested citizens, and reflect these in our legislative procedures. Only by incorporating the individual interests of the relevant groups in compromise legislative texts can we produce good legislation.
That being the case, the public naturally needs access to information, something which – I should like to emphasise – is also extremely important, and there needs to be more of it.
It surprises me, of course, that the Commission occasionally sends information to NGOs and associations rather than to the Members of the European Parliament; I have discovered – for example, in connection with REACH – that many organisations and associations have been getting such information before it reaches our pigeonholes. That does not worry me, but what does worry me is the shape and form of the amendments to the present regulation.
Stipulating that NGOs – which, incidentally, safeguard sectoral interests – may take legal action to see their views incorporated into legislative texts actually presupposes considerable mistrust in Parliament. As a rule, all European institutions seem to be regarded with general suspicion.
Permit me to allude to my previous occupation as a veterinary surgeon when I say that we are castrating ourselves and depriving ourselves of power here. We are calling ourselves into question and, in my opinion, we cannot allow this to happen. It would be a grave error to endorse this proposal; we should firmly oppose it.
I am not implying that any NGO intends to exert a harmful influence on social developments, but I do request that it not be implied that Parliament is not up to its job.
I wholeheartedly support the Council’s views on the second reading; everything else goes distinctly too far. That includes the proceedings for infringement of Community law, where intervention in ongoing proceedings is permitted: this does not benefit the public, either."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples