Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-11-15-Speech-2-009-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111115.4.2-009-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Council made an urgent request for Parliament to express its opinion – and I repeat, only its opinion – on the dossier to which I have been designated rapporteur, during the meeting of the Committee on Fisheries of November 2011. As rapporteur, and on behalf of the entire Committee on Fisheries, I oppose the Council’s urgent request and believe that it is necessary to explain the reasons for this decision.
The Council’s proposal concerns access to the exclusive economic zone off the coast of French Guiana for fishing vessels flying Venezuelan flags. The proposal is similar to an international agreement according to which, by virtue of the Treaty of Lisbon, Parliament has the right to express itself in the capacity of colegislator within the context of ordinary legislative procedure and should not express only its opinion.
The substance of the proposal does not present any difficulties and, upon its approval, although signed by the Council, will produce within the context of international law obligations for the parties that are similar to those of a fisheries agreement in due form.
However, the main point of our decision lies elsewhere. The European Commission passed on this proposal to Parliament on the basis of specific legal grounds – that is, Articles 43 and 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – and Parliament fully accepted it, in view of the content and spirit of this proposal which grants it, amongst other things, a power of approval. It was at this point that the Council, in its subsequent reference to Parliament, amended the legal grounds, setting aside Articles 43 and 218 and opting for Article 43(3), and Article 218(6), thereby reducing Parliament’s power to that of simply expressing an opinion.
The coordinators of our Committee on Fisheries have rejected this amendment by the Council and have submitted this issue for examination, prior to taking on any definitive position, to the Committee on Legal Affairs. The latter has confirmed the validity of the legal grounds adopted initially by the European Commission and, in particular, has warned our Committee on Fisheries of the unfavourable precedent that could be set by putting this combination of Article 43(3), and Article 218(6), of the Treaty into force.
At the Council’s insistence to obtain an opinion and not an approval in the shortest time possible, Ms Fraga Estévez, Chair of the Committee on Fisheries, in a letter to President Buzek, reiterated the positions of both the Committee on Fisheries and the Committee on Legal Affairs, and suggested that, in order to resolve the controversy, President Buzek should send a proposal containing the original legal grounds to the Council.
On 26 October 2011, President Buzek sent a letter to this effect to the President of the Council, and has still not received a reply. Therefore, it seems appropriate to wait for the Council’s response, and it is of utmost importance to reiterate that we are not prepared to abandon Parliament’s fundamental rights which we have a duty to defend."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples