Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-14-Speech-2-206"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061114.36.2-206"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, it is just as well that the Commissioners do not have voting rights. Otherwise, we could soon be voted down in this House. It is also good that the Commission is proposing more voluntary coordination through communications instead of binding rules, but I fear that the compulsory dimension will, rather, come from the European Court of Justice and from the Commission’s own use of rules governing competition and state aid. That is, of course, what the Commission has done, for example, with its communication on music rights. Parliament had adopted one position, which the Commission did not like. The Commission then turned to matters relating to the abuse of monopolies and adopted a communication instead of rules, which it would perhaps never have been possible to adopt. The European Parliament and the national parliaments should demand that all draft communications be submitted to them. In that way, we can make it known whether we want to have binding rules or a cocktail of communications and of decisions by the European Court of Justice.
I wish to commend the Commission for having, every week since 15 September, sent proposals to the Member States for submission to the proximity and necessity test. As far as I know, the parliaments have not, however, responded once. How lazy can they be as representatives of the people? On Monday and Tuesday, the national parliaments will come together for the COSAC meeting in Helsinki and they should not miss the opportunity to put some order into the jungle of laws from Brussels. Let all the specialist committees and European Affairs Committees colour-code every single proposal: black, if the national parliament wants to see binding EU laws; green, if there are to be minimum provisions with the option of better protection for welfare, health, the environment, the working environment, security, consumer protection and animal welfare; yellow, if the desire is merely for voluntary coordination instead of binding laws; and red, if the EU is to steer completely clear of a matter. With colour-coding like that, it would be very easy for the Commission to see at a glance what is wanted. In this way, it would be possible to obtain bottom-up European cooperation instead of the centralism that we have at present."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples