Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-23-Speech-4-015"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081023.4.4-015"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I wish to begin by congratulating the rapporteur on a very comprehensive report and also the Ombudsman and his staff on the many positive steps that they took in 2007.
What I find most encouraging is that the Ombudsman works at so many different levels: it is not just about processing complaints, which is central to his work, but also about how resolutions or solutions are arrived at. There is an increasing number of friendly solutions, more informal procedures, where relations with the institutions are such that a growing number of cases are solved rapidly. That is real progress and must be built on. Citizen-friendly solutions are where we want to go.
I am also pleased to see that better communication at all levels is central to the agenda of the Ombudsman. The adoption of the European Network of Ombudsmen statement and increased cooperation in this area are vital, and we look forward to the launch of the new website, which will include an interactive guide to assist citizens.
However, this brings me to my final comment, which concerns citizens, and refers to the proposed oral amendment on paragraph 23. That paragraph reads: ‘Proposes that the Ombudsman take measures to reduce the number of complaints (a total of 1 021) in relation to which no steps have been taken by him at all’. The oral amendment seeks to change that final phrase – ‘in relation to which no steps have been taken by him at all’ – to the statement ‘in such cases where no action is possible’.
From the perspective of the Ombudsman, no action is possible; but from the perspective of the citizen, no action is taken – and those are two very different perspectives.
So I have a question: is it made clear to the 1 021 citizens that no action is possible by the Ombudsman, with a clear explanation given with further advice where possible, or is it the case that simply no action is taken? If the former is true and citizens are given reasons, I have no problem and, indeed, I am very pleased. But if the latter is true and no action is taken, then citizens will be frustrated and angry. So I would like clarification on that point, please."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples