Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-05-23-Speech-3-336-500"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120523.15.3-336-500"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"If the aim was to bring the exercise of the right of inquiry in line with the structure of the Treaty of Lisbon, without impinging on the other control bodies, whether national or not, the text can be viewed as a good summary and, as such, I support it. It was necessary to take steps to promote activity by Parliament in this field that would not prove superfluous but which, at the same time, could be seen as incisive in terms of political control of contraventions or maladministration of EU law. This need is strengthened by the emergence of figures such as the Ombudsman and the powers now granted to other bodies.
Within the framework of a multiplicity of such bodies – and also in view of the level of divergence in the Member States’ legal systems – experience has shown that the instruments available to Parliament, provided for by Decision 95/167/EC, Euratom, ECSC (deriving from the Treaty of Maastricht), are inadequate. The modest work done by the committees of inquiry reveals, as well as caution on the part of Members and Parliament, which we do not doubt, an essentially impotent framework. We should not forget that Parliament is probably the only instrument (in this case, for scrutinising the administration of EU law) that is completely under the control of European citizens and is, of necessity, responsible for its actions and easy to recall."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples