Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-15-Speech-4-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010315.2.4-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – The proposal for a directive recasting the three generations of life insurance directives is a response to pressure from Parliament, Council, industry and consumers, in fact anyone who has to deal day-to-day with the complexities of the Community insurance legislation.
Your objective is to facilitate the comprehension and application of the insurance directives by setting them out in a legal text that is clear, coherent and complete. Mr Karas has just asked for texts to be as clear and transparent as possible and that was the Commission's aim in the text which is in front of you.
In addition to the codification of the provisions, some minor amendments which do not affect the substance of the texts were considered to be necessary. The exercise has gone beyond a pure codification and that is why this is a ‘recast’ version. A purely recodified text would have included a considerable number of repetitions, inconsistencies and obsolete provisions.
I intend shortly to present to the Commission and, if the Commission agrees, to Parliament, a parallel proposal for a recast – again recast – version of the non-life insurance directives. Clearly the Community's insurance legislation is not going to be stopped because of the codification exercise. New proposals are being discussed which, once they have been adopted, will require new amendments to the recast directives. We cannot stop the legislation tree growing but we can prune and train it so that it does not become an overgrown tangle as it has been in the past. I am extremely grateful to Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market and particularly to the rapporteur, Lord Inglewood, here represented by Mr Harbour, for their efficient handling of this matter. Mr Harbour also just said that this is a good model for other legislation and I entirely agree with him. It is an example of efficiency which Parliament may well want to adopt in other instances as well.
They have appreciated the fact that, although the proposal exceeds the limits of pure codification, it does not really contain any legislative change. It therefore calls for more expeditious consideration than a normal legislative proposal and that is what has happened. They have recommended to Members of Parliament that you should approve this proposal without any amendment and I invite Parliament to follow the recommendation of the rapporteur and approve the proposal without amendments.
The Commission hopes a directive will soon be adopted, if possible with only one reading by this Parliament. That would be a very good example of a fast-track procedure."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples