Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-03-Speech-2-271"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010703.14.2-271"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the Commission is pleased with the progress on its proposal for a decision on radio spectrum policy. I too would especially like to thank Angelika Niebler for her report. This proposal is part of a whole which the Commission would like to see adopted by the end of the year.
The Commission would like to state that the wide-ranging discussions of recent years are now producing results, as the general importance of the radio spectrum and the need for efficient decision making are starting to be recognised. Today, following discussion in the committee, the issue is having its first reading in the European Parliament. The timing is ideal, since, after much discussion, the Council, for its part, last week reached consensus on the new text which largely confirms the Commission’s original aims. Following its examination of Angelika Niebler’s report and the new amendments, the Commission can state that it is satisfied that Parliament in principle supports the Commission’s proposal. Despite this, the Commission has some detailed observations on various parts of the report.
From the Commission’s point of view the most problematic aspect of the report is that it does not sufficiently distinguish between, on the one hand, issues which fall under the codecision procedure and, on the other, issues to be decided by the committee procedure. All the amendments to be approved must comply with the comitology rules agreed for the EU institutions, which guide the use of the committee procedures and according to which the Radio Spectrum Committee will also have to operate. Some amendments propose that all the decisions should be made by the codecision procedure, in other words that this procedure be adopted in agreeing the Community’s common policy and also in agreeing such technical implementation measures required in order to comply with the policies agreed. In the opinion of the Commission, the latter, i.e. technical implementation measures, should be agreed by committee, where they would be determined using the committee procedure. In addition, the report presents amendments according to which the European Parliament could revoke or amend measures already realised via the committee procedure. In the view of the Commission, this conflicts with the Comitology Decision.
I would like to remind you of the main principle of the proposal: whenever the European Parliament and the Council, using the codecision procedure or by other means, agree Community policy concerning the radio spectrum, such as the Galileo project or the Single European Sky project, they agree at the same time that radio frequencies are available in order to realise this Community policy in practice. In this context the committee procedure is needed to enable us to decide on the technical implementation measures which are essential in order to realise the agreed Community policy. To clarify the matter further it can also be stated that the committee procedure is not used to agree Community policy which may depend on radio frequencies or such harmonisation which go beyond merely technical implementation measures. In such cases, the codecision procedure is used.
For this reason the Commission cannot accept those amendments from Parliament which conflict with the central approach of our proposal for a decision. Parliament’s amendments, according to which, all the decisions made by the committee procedure would be brought before Parliament and where Parliament would have the right to amend or revoke them if they concern issues other than purely technical implementation measures are against the rules set out in the Comitology Decision. According to the Comitology Decision, the Commission must re-examine draft measures if, according to a resolution by Parliament, they exceed the implementing powers provided for in the instrument on which they are based and inform Parliament of the action it intends to take on Parliament’s resolution and of its reasons for doing so. In this context the most important amendments from the Commission’s point of view are Amendments Nos 10 and 19, and the Commission also requests that the Members of the European Parliament reconsider their opinion on these amendments as they already have regarding Amendments Nos 21, 22 and 23.
However, I would finally like to emphasise that the Commission greatly values Parliament’s seeking to play an active role in the decision-making process regarding the radio spectrum. For precisely this reason the Commission referred in its proposal to the existing opportunities for doing so – the codecision procedure and the committee procedure. As for the other amendments, the Commission can approve Amendments Nos 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 17 and 22 – 25. We accept Amendments 3, 7, 9, 11 – 13 and 20 in principle. The Commission is unable to approve any other amendments.
To conclude, I can state that the opinions of the institutions on the aims of the proposed decision have converged. This should be seen as a guiding principle in further preparation for the entry into force of the decision. On this basis the Commission is ready to continue open cooperation with the European Parliament."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples