Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-03-Speech-3-136"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-12-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Assessment of OLAF2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20031203.10.3-136"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-12-03-Speech-3-1372
lpv:speaker	lp:Heide Rühle2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-10-31--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; G/EFA (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; CONT (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we too would like to thank the rapporteur for his comprehensive work. On this occasion, unfortunately, we are unable to support him on all points, and we regret that there was not enough time left for a discussion of the individual amendments before the vote in committee. We identify two main problems with the amendments. Firstly, we are in favour of strengthening the Supervisory Committee, but we are also against the Supervisory Committee then being allocated to the European Parliament. If a Supervisory Committee is to be genuinely independent in its evaluations, it should be independent of Parliament as well. At the moment, we can perceive another tendency in the current debate about the Supervisory Committee. It is extremely regrettable that there is still no European Public Prosecutor at present and that we will probably have to wait some time for this. However, we should not now make the mistake of trying to achieve a transitional solution which pushes the Supervisory Committee vicariously into this role, as this would not be the appropriate role. What we need, in the long term, is judicial control of OLAF, but this can only be provided by the European Public Prosecutor, not by a substitute committee. We take an equally critical view of another problem. We see that Parliament is increasingly seeking to involve itself in OLAF’s internal affairs, and we do not think this is right. We take the view that OLAF must be – and must remain – genuinely independent, but this does not mean that its independence from the Commission is necessarily strengthened if this House gets involved in micromanaging OLAF at the same time. That is quite wrong, in our view. Genuine independence also means administrative independence. Overall, I think we need a thorough rethink of the amendments. I hope that we can achieve a compromise that a majority in the committee can support. I would also, however, like to make one thing clear to Mrs Stauner. We will not support most of your amendments, for we think it wrong that they should contain an implicit vote of no confidence in OLAF and apportion blame – also in a one-sided way – as regards the Commission’s role in the Eurostat affair. This is something we will not go along with."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph