Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-014"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060614.2.3-014"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr Barroso, ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased, Mr Barroso, that you have changed your mind regarding what you said a year ago and regarding the Constitution. I only hope that you do not change your mind again and that you can demonstrate the same determination to the Member States too.
Firstly, if the declaration must be ready in March and if the European Parliament intends to contribute to it in some way, I believe that we ought to say something different regarding the matter on which we are due to vote tomorrow, which is simply that we need to retain this text and that this Constitutional Treaty is the only thing that the European Parliament can accept.
Mr Leinen, this resolution does nothing to further the debate on Europe that we all want. If we intend to achieve a result, then we must also make the content of our proposal clear. The Member States have not succeeded in doing this but, unfortunately, neither have we.
Secondly, on the subject of sustainable development, we find a number of very interesting statements in the final declarations that we have received. Nevertheless, we believe that there are practical things that need to be done and that are not even being proposed. A more decisive measure is needed on climate change, on transport and on biodiversity, and the European Union’s funds need to be used in a more environmentally friendly way. Instead, all that we are doing is taking a step backwards, with a set of proposals on air, on waste and on many other subjects that well and truly baffle us.
We are pleased that the importance of transparency has been reaffirmed yet again, even though we believe that it is far more important to effectively monitor the application of Community law than to get tangled up in complicated and very costly impact assessment procedures. This trend is very fashionable, but we feel that getting tangled up in complicated and not particularly transparent procedures is a danger to our democracy.
Furthermore, Mr Barroso, we are still encountering a whole host of problems in terms of transparency and accessing documents, with regard to which we do not feel that the Commission is doing enough. We therefore endorse what the Council has done, even though we know that words are one thing and actions are quite something else, and we have already made various proposals and requests that have not been exhausted to date.
Thirdly, I wanted to address the issue of the external dimension. Mr Winkler, on the subject of energy, we are slightly concerned by the fact that the only priority mentioned in the conclusions relates to the acquisition of resources and to the transportation of those resources within transit countries, while no reference is made whatsoever to eco-efficiency and renewable energy sources. These elements have an external dimension, however, because the 15 international car manufacturers have an impact on oil prices that is perhaps equal to that of OPEC. I believe that this silence from Europe is a negative element.
Furthermore, in the final conclusions you state that it is hoped that a negotiating mandate will be adopted for the Balkans. Yet who should grant this mandate, if not the Presidency of the Council? I believe that, on this point, over and above hoping, you ought to be more specific.
I shall conclude by addressing you, Mr Winkler, because when you spoke about Tunisia yesterday, we were very disappointed and surprised. You said that a number of funds for NGOs had been released. That is not true, and the Commission also confirms it. The sum of EUR 900 000 for the Human Rights League has not been released, and I regard the fact that the Presidency is claiming the opposite here as extremely negative. I urge you to check your sources and to let us know whether or not this corresponds to the truth, because this is a very serious example contributing to Europe’s lack of credibility."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples