Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-05-05-Speech-3-211"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100505.69.3-211"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"−
I voted in favour of the report on the power of legislative delegation. Article 290 of the Treaty of Lisbon allows Parliament to raise objections to or revoke the Commission’s amendments and supplements to legislative acts. However, this requires an absolute majority, in other words a majority of the number of elected MEPs. In view of the absence of Members, this normally means 60% of those voting. Previously, only the Council was able to do this, provided a qualified majority of votes was obtained. The Commission’s expert groups, which are hand-picked from the Member States, have a great deal of influence in legislative delegation. One example of this is provided by the fact that, via an expert group, the Commission permitted a new type of genetically modified maize, despite the fact that Parliament and the Council were opposed to this. Another example is the original Services Directive, where the Council and Parliament deleted a paragraph that stated that it was to be prohibited to demand a permanent representative in the case of the posting of workers, in other words a trade union counterpart. The Commission went against this, however, and drew up guidelines establishing that it was not necessary to have a permanent representative. The Commission wants to safeguard its independence and continue to use its expert groups (). The rapporteur, Mr Szájer, rejects both national expert groups and the involvement of national authorities. I do not agree with the latter point."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples