Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-11-Speech-2-134"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020611.8.2-134"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the draft Council Decision which is before the House today marks the culmination of a long process. A moment ago we were arguing about whether it was 25 years or 30 years. Either way it has been a long process.
Since 1960, when the draft convention on election to Parliament by universal suffrage was adopted, our House has produced five reports which have ended up deadlocked within the Council. At last the Spanish Presidency has achieved a laborious agreement within the Council. We must celebrate this and congratulate the presidency on this delicate manoeuvring.
This text includes the majority of the proposals the European Parliament had made in the Anastasopoulos report. Specifically, it introduces the principle of proportional representation with each Member State having a choice about the type of preferential list it wishes, the incompatibility of the status of a Member of a national parliament with that of a Member of the European Parliament, with exceptions for the United Kingdom and Ireland until the 2009 elections, the power of each Member State to set the ceiling for the electoral expenses of candidates and the power of each Member State to create territorial constituencies which do not affect in a general sense the proportional nature of the elections.
It also brings the 1976 Act into line with the changes introduced by the successive Treaties in the institutions and bodies of the Union and an intelligent solution is found for compliance with the 'Matthews' judgment on the vote of the electorate of Gibraltar.
It is true that Parliament’s other proposals have not been included, such as the single constituency for the whole of the European Union, the movement of elections to the month of May and the objective of parity between men and women on electoral lists. Some people will therefore say that this is a minimal agreement, but the rapporteur believes that it is better to take a step forward towards a more homogenous electoral system, than to remain in the blind alley we were trapped in.
This is how the European Union has acted, moving forward prudently, sometimes excessively so, but moving forward nonetheless, like tortoises, slowly but surely. Of course the assent does not mean renouncing Parliament’s positions. The rapporteur has opted to re-state them in the recitals, improved by the contributions of the members of the committee, whom I would like to warmly and expressly thank for their cooperation.
These are not purely rhetorical demands. The draft Decision lays down that the Act would be subject to a new review before 2009, by which time Parliament’s demands could be incorporated. For all these reasons, I would ask you to support the assent in favour of the draft Decision.
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I will end by mentioning a proposal by President Delors, which could be a shot in the arm for the European elections: it simply consists of doing at Union level what is done in the Member States, that is, that the head of the electoral cartel should be proposed by the President of the Commission. The vote would therefore leave behind the realms of abstract notions and purely national references and give the Union a public face. I have included this proposal in the recitals, with the support of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, because I strongly believe that it is time that the citizens understood who they are voting for and why."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples