Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-07-Speech-4-048-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110707.4.4-048-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"− Madam President, let me start with a quote: ‘looking ahead, the Commission confirms that the Union would greatly benefit if a number of Members of the European Parliament were elected from European lists submitted to the whole of the European electorate.’
Both instruments would indeed seem necessary and would be put in place after the revised electoral act has been ratified. The Commission will need some time to draft a proposal on this. It will also likely take considerable time for Member States to agree so this would be only possible for the 2019 elections at the earliest.
This brings me to a specific request addressed to the Commission to present a new proposal for the revision of the current information exchange system to encourage participation of EU citizens in European elections in the Member State where they reside. The Commission has already made such a commitment but the proposal has been blocked in the Council since 2006 because Member States cannot find the unanimity required to adopt this proposal.
Another demand addressed to the Commission concerns statistics and your wish to improve the consistency and comparability of population data provided by Member States. On this point, I can announce that Commission services are currently working on a draft proposal which should be coming soon.
There are many other points in the report. Be sure that the Commission can only subscribe to principles such as the better representation of women and minority candidates or the respect of democratic rules in the selection of candidates. The Commission also supports the idea of having the elections in May rather than in June.
So this report concerns constitutional issues rather than simply legislation. The Commission is already ready to make some amendments in the procedure for the 2014 elections. I mentioned earlier the way forward with Directive 93/109/EC, taking into account the outcome of our debate today, to encourage people to stand and to prevent double voting based on the current ex-ante checks.
As regards statistics, the Commission is already preparing the proposal to improve the consistency and comparability of population data. Finally, three months ago, Vice-President Šefčovič promised you that he would examine your request to establish a specific European legal status for political parties at European level. The Commission is presently looking into the key elements in the Giannakou report with an open mind, and it may indeed come back to you in the near future.
This is an extract, not from the report presented to you today by your rapporteur, Andrew Duff, but actually from a communication forwarded by the Commission to the Convention in 2002. So the Commission remains convinced that European lists could help to enhance the transnational dimension of European elections.
So let me say a few words about Mr Duff’s report. First, I note the tremendous personal efforts of the rapporteur – and I would like to thank him – to seek wide support in the Parliament on such a complex and sensitive issue. The core of the report concerns the creation of a pan-European constituency to which 25 MEPs would be elected. I know some Members of this Assembly are against such lists, but I think it is an idea worth pursuing.
It will, however, not be easy to implement and here begin the concerns of the Commission. First, I am not sure our fellow citizens will understand the need to increase the number of seats. This was the conclusion of the Convention: above 750 Members an Assembly may find it difficult to function.
Second, increasing the total number of MEPs requires a Treaty change, unless the 25 MEPs elected on transnational lists would be part of the existing number. In the Commission’s opinion, this procedural difference is very significant. I understand your rapporteur has already tabled amendments to leave the door open.
Third, it was so difficult to reach a compromise on the allocation of seats between the Member States that it hardly seems conceivable to reopen such a debate right now. But such a discussion would be essential, should the 25 MEPs be part of the whole number here.
Fourth, the principal elements of the proposed reform would need to be ratified in all Member States. In some countries this could even mean a referendum. Are we ready to run the risk of a ‘no’ vote now? In the present climate of both institutional fatigue and economic austerity, any referendum would be risky, and the national parliamentary ratification processes cannot be taken for granted either.
In any case, the Treaty requires the European Council to adopt by unanimity a decision on a proposal from this Parliament so your Assembly – this is a clear message – has the right of initiative on this matter. There is no formal role for the Commission. I trust you will present your proposal in time for the European Council to decide early enough before the spring-2014 elections.
Moreover, the report brings forward the idea of creating an electoral authority to conduct and to verify the results of this election. It also provides for the creation of an electoral role to prevent double voting."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples