Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-292"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030604.8.3-292"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I too would like to thank the rapporteur and the Commissioner for their involvement in the debate this evening. Picking up from what some of the other Members have said, each of us recognises the benefits of the open method of coordination. As we have recognised and experienced ourselves, it can lead to better opportunities for the creation of frameworks in which actions can be taken, without the strict rigidity of legislation or regulation.
The other institutions should recognise and realise that Parliament is very responsible in arriving at its opinion when it is given time to be consulted. One of the most important issues we need to stress here tonight is that this Parliament has the ability, the innovation and indeed the skill to meet deadlines. However, merely throwing it to Parliament when there is no time available to put a reasoned and responsible viewpoint forward is a bigger insult to Parliament than not consulting it at all.
If we consider the question of the guidelines which we discussed this week, we see the difficulties and problems that were created, simply because we were not given the information in time. We should not be seen as an enemy of the Council and the Commission, nor as a subservient body, but as a willing and equal partner to them.
With regard to the question of whether an institutional agreement or an article in a proposed treaty or Constitution is the best place for this, I personally have not made up my mind on that point. However, I am inclined to favour an interinstitutional agreement as the best way forward, probably because it offers flexibility for us to alter and change in the future. But for us to agree to that, and for our representatives in the Convention to go along that line would require some faith from our point of view that we would be given more powers and consulted on a wider basis by the Commission and the Council when they look at these issues in the future.
Before I conclude, the question of consultation with national parliaments is one that we continually stress here in Parliament. That is because we recognise that parliaments, by their very nature, are the true democratic representatives of the peoples of the Member States of the European Union. Parliaments therefore have a right to be consulted and not to be bypassed over issues that impact directly on the lives of people within the European Union.
It is essential that national parliaments be part of this method and, indeed, if we look at the draft Constitution which we have before us, there is a requirement with regard to legislation being transmitted to national parliaments. It is quite possible also that in an open method of coordination, the national parliaments would also have transmitted to them the proposals which are coming before this Parliament and other institutions.
In conclusion, I will be supporting Mrs Smet's report on the basis that the procedure does not seek to harmonise policies or converge policies, but facilitates compatibility, facilitates flexibility and encourages dissemination of best practices and exchanges of ideas."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples