合法博彩网站

听听Der Pr盲sident. 鈥� Als n盲chster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache 眉ber den Bericht von Paulo Rangel im Namen des Ausschusses f眉r konstitutionelle Fragen 眉ber das Initiativrecht des Parlaments () (础9鈥�0142/2022).

Dieser Tagesordnungspunkt l盲uft unter den gleichen Regeln, die Ihnen bekannt sind听鈥� Rednerpult, blaue Karten, erste Reihen d眉rfen gef眉llt werden听鈥� ab, und ich komme daher sofort zum ersten Redner, dem Berichterstatter, Paulo Rangel.

听听Paulo Rangel, rapporteur. 鈥� Mr听President, dear Vice鈥擯resident, I would like to thank you for your presence, because I know that you made an effort to be here today. I would like to start by stating that I deeply regret that this debate isn鈥檛 acknowledged as a key debate by our 合法博彩网站.

The same applies to the previous debate on electoral law reform and the debate that we鈥檒l have tomorrow on the triggering of Article听48. If this Hemicycle, if this institution, doesn鈥檛 acknowledge these kinds of debate as key debates, what should we expect from the other institutions when they evaluate and appreciate our constitutional claims? I made this clear to the Presidency of this House and to the Conference of Presidents.

A tradi莽茫o constitucional dos Estados-Membros, assim como da Europa e das Am茅ricas, 茅 dar aos parlamentos, por causa da sua legitimidade democr谩tica direta, um direito geral de iniciativa legislativa. Esta 茅, ali谩s, uma reivindica莽茫o hist贸rica dos parlamentos: transformar o direito de peti莽茫o ao rei, que era um direito de iniciativa indireto, num verdadeiro direito de iniciativa legislativa.

Todavia, a Uni茫o Europeia n茫o honra ainda esta tradi莽茫o constitucional e o Parlamento tem alguns poucos direitos especiais de iniciativa, mas n茫o tem um direito geral de iniciativa. Tem apenas iniciativa indireta. 脡 verdade que n贸s temos hoje no Provedor de Justi莽a, na lei eleitoral, nas comiss玫es de inqu茅rito, o direito de iniciativa, mas curiosamente estes direitos de iniciativa exclusiva do Parlamento n茫o s茫o ainda reconhecidos como atos que exigem um procedimento legislativo mais importante do que aquele que 茅 o da codecis茫o.

Mr听President, dear colleagues, dear Vice鈥擯resident, the Report that we鈥檒l vote on tomorrow clearly shows the towering institutional architecture is ready for a different distribution of the right of initiative. To acknowledge a general and global right of initiative of the 合法博彩网站 is possible, desirable and responds to the constitutional aspiration of making the European Union more democratically legitimate.

I want to strengthen democratic legitimacy, representative democracy. If we want to strengthen them, then 合法博彩网站 has to have these rights. This Commission has honoured the commitment of President von听der听Leyen to always respond with a legislative act to 合法博彩网站鈥檚 requests under Article听25 on time, with only one or two understandable exceptions.

But President von听der听Leyen, she also says that she is in favour of a right of initiative to the 合法博彩网站! President Macron also says that! And even today the Taoiseach of Ireland said that in this Hemicycle. So it鈥檚 time to act!

Our citizens, they really aspire for more. And the Conference on the Future of Europe proposed several farther-looking proposals, the right of initiative is one of them. And this is the momentum.

I must say that if there is a huge consensus, as it seems that there is, on this very issue of giving to the 合法博彩网站 this right of direct initiative, then we could have even a revision of the Treaties only for that purpose, because there is a huge consensus in this respect.

And so I think that a new distribution of legislative right of initiative should be acknowledged on our Treaties, should be acknowledged by the institutions. And I have to say, and to add, this doesn鈥檛 imply that the Commission doesn鈥檛 have its own right of initiative. It is of our tradition in all our countries that both the executive and legislative bodies have the right of initiative.

听听Der Pr盲sident. 鈥� Nachdem Sie auch das Pr盲sidium angesprochen haben, Herr Berichterstatter, kann ich sehr klar sagen: Ich teile den Hinweis, den Sie am Anfang gemacht haben, und ich kann f眉r das Pr盲sidium dieses Hauses sehr klar sagen, dass wir uns zu 100听% verpflichten, alles zu unternehmen, um die Vorschl盲ge und die Ideen der Konferenz zur Zukunft Europas und der B眉rgerinnen und B眉rger von der Einberufung des Konvents bis hin zum Wahlrecht und dem Initiativrecht und dar眉ber hinaus zu begleiten und zu unterst眉tzen. Danke f眉r diesen Hinweis.

听听Pascal Durand, rapporteur pour avis de la commission des affaires juridiques. 鈥撎齅onsieur le Pr茅sident, merci de votre rappel sur la conf茅rence sur l鈥檃venir de l鈥橢urope. Je suis tout d鈥檃bord tr猫s heureux d鈥檃bord de parler apr猫s mon ami Paulo听Rangel, parce que c鈥檈st toujours tr猫s clair et on a des principes qui nous sont rappel茅s. Je suis ensuite content de parler devant vous, Monsieur le Commissaire. Vous savez 脿 quel point nous partageons un certain nombre de valeurs: les termes d茅mocratie et transparence sont deux mots, je le sais, qui vous sont chers et qui nous sont 茅galement tr猫s chers. Donc, essayons de faire en sorte que ces mots aient un contenu nouveau.

Le travail parlementaire 茅volue, la d茅mocratie europ茅enne 茅volue et nous devons essayer de rentrer dans un monde plus moderne. Nous l鈥檃vons vu avec les citoyens et c鈥櫭﹖ait d鈥檃illeurs ce que demandait la commission JURI. Cela a effectivement 茅t茅 rappel茅 par la conf茅rence sur l鈥檃venir de l鈥橢urope, c鈥檈st la proposition听38, mais nous avons 茅galement demand茅, dans le cadre de la commission JURI, que l鈥檕n puisse donner une suite l茅gislative aux initiatives citoyennes europ茅ennes. C鈥檈st l脿 aussi une forme de d茅mocratie tr猫s importante, nouvelle.

Donc, ce droit d鈥檌nitiative, nous en avons tous besoin. Tout ne peut pas reposer sur les 茅paules de la Commission. Le Conseil a d茅j脿 un droit d鈥檌nitiative, de fait, sur certains sujets, comme la s茅curit茅 ou la justice. Mais il a 茅galement la possibilit茅 de travailler en amont avec la Commission. Nous ne l鈥檃vons pas. Donc, donnons-nous la possibilit茅 de faire avancer, faisons en sorte que ce droit d鈥檌nitiative soit reconnu au Parlement et, comme l鈥檃 tr猫s bien dit Paulo听Rangel, 莽a n鈥檈nl猫ve rien aux autres, 莽a ajoute.

C鈥檈st le message que nous voulons vous faire passer aujourd鈥檋ui, 茅galement au nom de la commission JURI. En tant que membre de la commission AFCO, je soutiens 茅videmment ce qu鈥檃 dit Paulo听Rangel.

听听Maro拧 艩ef膷ovi膷, Vice-President of the Commission. 鈥� Mr听President, honourable Members, dear Mr听Rangel, dear Mr Durand, indeed today we are discussing a report which is not only institutionally important for the Commission, but also holds a great deal of personal significance for both President von der Leyen and myself. I would like to thank our rapporteur, Mr听Rangel, for his work and also for the constructive spirit, which is reflected in the final report.

I would like to underscore that the European Commission is fully aware of the importance of the question of the right of initiative for the European 合法博彩网站. So from the outset I want to assure you of the Commission鈥檚 full commitment to continuing the positive cooperation with 合法博彩网站 and its committees in these matters.

As you know, the President of the Commission in her political guidelines stressed that she supports the right of initiative for the European 合法博彩网站. Just to quote her very precisely, she noted that when the European 合法博彩网站, acting by a majority of its Members, adopts resolutions requesting that the Commission submit legislative proposals, the Commission would commit to responding with a legislative act in full respect of proportionality, subsidiarity and better law鈥攎aking principles.

I hope you would agree with me that the Commission has been taking this commitment very seriously. We have adapted our working method to ensure that the work on this resolution is coordinated on a weekly basis, and that the College of Commissioners debates all replies to 合法博彩网站鈥檚 resolutions adopted under Article 225 of the Treaty.

I really would like to thank for his good cooperation Antonio Tajani, former chair of the CCC, and Bernd Lange, with whom we are working right now, because here I think that we really improved our coordination and cooperation, and also our upstream exchange of information.

This good cooperation has also translated into very concrete figures. 合法博彩网站 has adopted 18 resolutions up to now, in this legislative period. The Commission has already replied to all of them, with the last replies being sent yesterday. Of the 18, the Commission replied positively to 17 of them, and I think we all would agree that we have been quite glad that we do not have to respond to the last one because it was on MFF contingency planning, and I think we鈥檝e all been quite pleased and happy that we didn鈥檛 need it because we had the MFF approved 鈥� as we all preferred, of course.

I have to say that this positive tendency and trend is also reflected in the Commission鈥檚 work programme, and I am glad that I can inform you that we have already delivered on almost all the legislative acts requested, with 90% already adopted, and we are actively working on those which are still outstanding. So this just underlines the Commission鈥檚 willingness to work together with the European 合法博彩网站.

So I am very pleased that the report being put to a vote today acknowledges the Commission for delivering on the President鈥檚 clear political commitment in relation to the follow鈥攗p to this resolution.

We also would like to reassure you that we take good note of the call in the report for a more generalised, direct right of initiative of the 合法博彩网站. It is clear that such a broader right would require Treaty change. In the Commission鈥檚 view, such an idea would require very thorough reflection on the respective competences of the institutions and the balance between them, as well as on the legal, procedural and practical implications.

Meanwhile, I would like again to underline the commitment that the Commission will continue to honour the commitment to follow鈥攗p on Article 222 resolutions, as we have done until now.

I really would like to thank the honourable Members and the JURI and AFCO Committees for the great cooperation in this matter, and I look forward to continuing our upstream coordination with the CCC.

听听Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield, rapporteure pour avis de la commission des libert茅s civiles, de la justice et des affaires int茅rieures. 鈥� Monsieur le Pr茅sident, le Parlement europ茅en doit 锚tre reconnu comme col茅gislateur. Le quasi-monopole de la Commission sur听le l茅gislatif est d茅l茅t猫re pour notre d茅mocratie et parfaitement injustifiable 脿 cette 茅tape听de notre histoire europ茅enne. L鈥橴nion europ茅enne reste une d茅mocratie immature, et听c鈥檈st notamment du fait de ce d茅ficit d茅mocratique-l脿. Le Parlement europ茅en n鈥檈st pas encore un v茅ritable parlement. Il doit le devenir, devenir une chambre d鈥櫭﹍aboration de la loi, et plus seulement un lieu de d茅bat qui influence la loi. D猫s maintenant nous devons aussi听amender l鈥檃ccord-cadre de听2010 sur les relations entre le听Parlement europ茅en et la Commission europ茅enne pour tenir la Pr茅sidente de la Commission comptable, comptable de son engagement solennel 脿 mieux travailler avec notre institution repr茅sentative.

Cela a 茅t茅 rappel茅, les citoyennes et les citoyens investis dans la conf茅rence sur l鈥檃venir de l鈥橢urope ont demand茅 des institutions plus efficaces et plus d茅mocratiques, et ce Parlement听茅lu saurait r茅pondre aux besoins et aux demandes de la soci茅t茅. Par exemple, le Parlement voulait ajouter les crimes fond茅s sur le genre 脿 la liste des eurocrimes. Et ce n鈥檈st pas par hasard, c鈥檈st parce que c鈥檈st une n茅cessit茅 pour aider nos pays 脿 锚tre plus f茅ministes et 脿 prendre en compte la souffrance de plus de la moiti茅 de la population. Et m锚me si, dans les affaires constitutionnelles, je suis souvent seule avec quelques coll猫gues femmes, nous comptons quand m锚me.

Enfin, c鈥檈st aussi ce Parlement qui d茅fend le mieux les droits et les libert茅s des citoyennes et des citoyens. C鈥檈st ce Parlement qui a fait preuve de courage politique et de pers茅v茅rance听pour compenser l鈥檌naction du Conseil et de la Commission en mati猫re d鈥櫭﹖at de droit, ce Parlement qui a mis en route l鈥檃rticle听7, paragraphe听1, contre le gouvernement hongrois et fait听tout ce qui 茅tait en son pouvoir pour faire progresser la proc茅dure avec l鈥檌mplication des cinq groupes les plus d茅mocrates. Et aujourd鈥檋ui, avec un droit r茅el d鈥檌nitiative, le Parlement europ茅en pourrait activer l鈥檃rticle听7, paragraphe听2, et mettre des sanctions sur la听table.

听听Antonio Tajani, a nome del gruppo PPE. 鈥� Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il voto di domani rappresenta un primo vero importante passo verso il diritto di iniziativa del Parlamento europeo. Per questo voglio ringraziare Paulo Rangel e tutti i componenti della commissione AFCO che ho l'onore di presiedere.

Sono anni che noi insistiamo affinch茅 questo Parlamento sia un Parlamento con pieni poteri, come lo sono i parlamenti di tutto il mondo. Se vogliamo, dopo questa crisi globale, con la guerra ora e il coronavirus e la crisi Lehman Brothers prima, avere un'Europa che sia fortemente politica, con i cittadini che la sentano come parte della loro vita, come ombrello che li protegga nei momenti di difficolt脿, servono istituzioni pi霉 democratiche, istituzioni pi霉 vicine ai cittadini. Un Parlamento che non ha il diritto d'iniziativa 猫 un Parlamento monco.

Quindi ritengo che noi dobbiamo avere il coraggio di andare avanti in questa direzione, in un quadro complessivo di riforme, perch茅 non pu貌 essere soltanto il diritto di iniziativa. Io personalmente ritengo che si debba arrivare all'elezione diretta del Presidente della Commissione. Alla fine poi bisognerebbe anche unificare la figura del Presidente della Commissione e del Presidente del Consiglio, come bisogna fare tante altre riforme.

Il voto all'unanimit脿 猫 un voto che blocca le nostre istituzioni. I cittadini rischieranno di non considerare mai l'Europa come un vero protagonista politico. Ecco perch茅 questa scelta che noi stiamo facendo rappresenta veramente un impulso a un cambiamento per avere un'Europa pi霉 democratica e quindi pi霉 vicina ai cittadini.

听听Brando Benifei, a nome del gruppo S&D. 鈥� Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, 猫 inconcepibile che un Parlamento che rappresenta 500 milioni di persone, l'unica istituzione europea eletta direttamente dai cittadini, non abbia il potere di proporre pienamente disegni di legge in autonomia.

L'Unione europea 猫 certamente un'organizzazione atipica, un vero e proprio esperimento politico in continua evoluzione perch茅 si deve adattare a un mondo che cambia. Ma adesso serve fare un passo ulteriore in avanti. Domani voteremo una risoluzione che chiede di modificare i trattati e dare il via alla Convenzione per una nuova Europa. E voteremo anche questa relazione dall'importanza cruciale, collegata, sul diritto di iniziativa del Parlamento europeo. Un tassello fondamentale per ribilanciare a favore dei cittadini l'equilibrio istituzionale rispetto alla Commissione e al Consiglio. Una richiesta che 猫 stata espressa proprio dai cittadini durante la Conferenza sul futuro dell'Europa. Un impegno che dobbiamo onorare.

Nel documento mettiamo nero su bianco un vero e proprio mandato negoziale chiaro: alla prossima revisione dei trattati il Parlamento europeo deve avere un diritto pieno e diretto di iniziativa legislativa. Ma 猫 fondamentale, allo stesso tempo, rafforzare le attuali modalit脿 attraverso le quali il Parlamento europeo esercita comunque un diritto di iniziativa indiretto.

La Presidente von der Leyen ha promesso di rispondere sempre alle richieste del Parlamento europeo adottate nelle nostre risoluzioni di iniziativa legislativa. Non basta, dobbiamo pretendere di pi霉, dobbiamo avere la garanzia legale che ci貌 accada ed 猫 questo che chiediamo nella richiesta di una revisione dell'accordo quadro del 2010.

Concludo sul tema della procedura d'iniziativa per lo Stato di diritto a norma dell'articolo 7 del trattato. 脠 uno scandalo che le ripetute azioni del Parlamento europeo siano cadute nel vuoto delle cancellerie degli Stati membri, che si rendono corresponsabili di abusi di diritto e di diritti. Ragione in pi霉 per riposizionare l'Eurocamera al centro dell'attivit脿 non soltanto legislativa, ma anche politica, di tutela fondamentale dei cittadini di tutta l'Unione. 脠 il momento di cambiare le cose.

听听Sandro Gozi, au nom du groupe Renew. 鈥� Monsieur le Pr茅sident, chers coll猫gues, un parlement propose et adopte des lois et contr么le l鈥檈x茅cutif, sinon ce n鈥檈st pas un parlement.听L鈥橢urope fait trop souvent semblant. On fait semblant d鈥檃voir une politique 茅trang猫re: on ne l鈥檃 pas. On fait semblant d鈥櫭﹍ire un Parlement de plein exercice et on ne l鈥檃 pas.

Cette assembl茅e doit devenir un Parlement 脿 part enti猫re, avec un pouvoir d鈥檌nitiative 茅largi,听comme les citoyens, lors de la conf茅rence sur l鈥檃venir de l鈥橢urope, l鈥檕nt demand茅. C鈥檈st n茅cessaire et urgent, surtout au moment o霉 l鈥檕n veut construire une Europe-puissance.听C鈥檈st une question de l茅gitimit茅 d茅mocratique encore plus indispensable au moment o霉 nous devons reprendre le contr么le, 脿 travers notre Union, sur des domaines qui 茅taient autrefois la chasse gard茅e des 脡tats: la d茅fense, les fronti猫res, la s茅curit茅, l鈥櫭﹖at de droit. C鈥檈st la r茅ponse enfin 脿 l鈥檈xigence de renforcer les liens de confiance et de responsabilit茅 politique entre les citoyens et l鈥橴nion. Nous voulons une Union europ茅enne听plus d茅mocratique, et donc nous voulons une Union europ茅enne avec un pouvoir听d鈥檌nitiative concurrent du Parlement. Ce pouvoir va aussi r茅茅quilibrer la progressive听茅rosion de facto du droit d鈥檌nitiative de la Commission par le Conseil europ茅en,听脿 laquelle nous assistons, impuissants, ces derni猫res ann茅es.

Je voudrais dire, chers coll猫gues: nous avons besoin dans notre Union de plus de d茅mocratie et de moins de 芦sherpacratie禄. L脿 aussi, arr锚tons de faire semblant. Le Conseil europ茅en doit orienter politiquement l鈥橴nion, pas empi茅ter r茅guli猫rement sur les pr茅rogatives l茅gislatives du Parlement et du Conseil. Nous devons arr锚ter de d茅naturer notre听syst猫me. Le monopole d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative de la Commission de facto n鈥檈xiste plus,听cher Maro拧, et il ne se justifie plus.

Je tiens donc 脿 remercier le rapporteur, Paulo听Rangel, pour son excellent travail dans ce dossier, qui envoie un signal fort. Le moment est venu de modifier les trait茅s et de donner au Parlement un droit d鈥檌nitiative g茅n茅ral et direct. En cette p茅riode de grandes transformations, une refondation d茅mocratique europ茅enne s鈥檌mpose. C鈥檈st le sens de notre听combat, et nous allons le gagner ensemble.

听听Damian Boeselager, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. 鈥� Mr President, dear colleagues, you all have said 鈥� and I think it鈥檚 absolutely clear 鈥� that we need the right to initiative.

I just want to make this very haptical. This whole House is built on the trust of citizens in their elected officials. We need to live up to this trust. That means that we can do two things that all parliamentarians should be able to do: one is that we are actually able to propose laws and also amend laws that already exist; the second is that we can vote for the European Commission.

Then we can transfer the trust that citizens gave us into the actual representative democracy that we should be. I think tomorrow we have a good chance to start this process of Treaty change to bring all of these ideas of a better parliamentary democracy into the European Union. I鈥檓 very happy that we are going this way.

听听Gilles Lebreton, au nom du groupe ID. 鈥� Monsieur le Pr茅sident, chers coll猫gues, faut-il reconna卯tre au Parlement europ茅en un droit d'initiative l茅gislative directe et g茅n茅rale ? Tout d茅pend de la conception que l'on se fait de l'Union europ茅enne.

Si, comme le rapporteur Paulo听Rangel, on veut transformer l'Union en un 脡tat, alors il faut le faire afin que le Parlement europ茅en ait des pouvoirs comparables 脿 ceux d'un parlement national. Mais si, comme moi, on pense que l'Union doit rester une simple organisation internationale, alors il ne saurait en 锚tre question. Car dans cette vision l脿, c'est le Conseil, en tant que repr茅sentant des 脡tats membres, qui doit d茅tenir l'initiative l茅gislative, comme le pr茅voient d茅j脿 dans certains domaines les articles听76, 121 et 241 du trait茅 sur le fonctionnement de l'UE.

Il faut donc bel et bien retirer le pouvoir d'initiative l茅gislative 脿 la Commission, organe d茅mocratiquement indigne de l'exercer, mais pour le transf茅rer au Conseil et non au Parlement europ茅en. Car le Parlement europ茅en n'est 脿 mes yeux que l'organe d茅lib茅ratif d'une organisation internationale et non le repr茅sentant d'un peuple europ茅en souverain qui n'existe pas.

听听Zdzis艂aw Krasnod臋bski, w imieniu grupy ECR. 鈥� Panie Przewodnicz膮cy! Nale偶y zgodzi膰 si臋 z pos艂em sprawozdawc膮, 偶e rzeczywi艣cie parlament bez prawa do inicjatywy ustawodawczej jest parlamentem niepe艂nym, u艂omnym. Ale Parlament Europejski nie jest parlamentem w takim sensie, w jakim parlamentami s膮 parlamenty w pa艅stwach demokracji parlamentarnej. A tym bardziej nie jest nadparlamentem ponad parlamentami narodowymi, jak s膮dz膮 niekt贸rzy koledzy.

Unia Europejska nie jest pa艅stwem, lecz zwi膮zkiem pa艅stw, a my, europarlamentarzy艣ci, jeste艣my przedstawicielami swoich narod贸w i jeste艣my wybierani w swoich pa艅stwach. Nie reprezentujemy jakiej艣 Europy in abstracto. Dlatego te偶 ten parlament nie jest i nie powinien by膰 parlamentem w 艣cis艂ym sensie, tym bardziej 偶e dominuj膮 w nim pogl膮dy oderwane od kontekstu spo艂ecznego i kulturowego, 偶e panuje w nim b艂臋dne przekonanie, 偶e Parlament Europejski ex definitione dzia艂a w abstrakcyjnym interesie wszystkich Europejczyk贸w. Ten parlament nie jest miejscem merytorycznych debat, najcz臋艣ciej. Rzadko dochodzi w nim do rzeczywistej wymiany argument贸w, kt贸rych sens jest rozumiany i rozwa偶any. Z tych te偶 wzgl臋d贸w uwa偶am, 偶e 偶adn膮 miar膮 Parlament Europejski nie powinien posiada膰 inicjatywy ustawodawczej.

听听Leila Chaibi, au nom du groupe The Left. 鈥撎齅onsieur le Pr茅sident, chers coll猫gues, j鈥檌magine que 莽a vous arrive aussi r茅guli猫rement d鈥櫭猼re interpell茅s par des citoyens, par des associations qui vous disent: 芦Il y a un probl猫me super important en Europe, il faudrait que l鈥橴nion europ茅enne l茅gif猫re. Et comme tu es d茅put茅e europ茅enne, eh bien vas-y!禄 Et j鈥檌magine qu鈥櫭� ce moment-l脿, comme moi, vous vous sentez un petit peu g锚n茅e de devoir expliquer que ce n鈥檈st pas aussi simple, et, surtout, que vous n鈥檃vez pas le pouvoir d鈥櫭ヽrire les lois.

Le Parlement europ茅en est le seul au monde 脿 ne pas avoir le droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative, c鈥檈st-脿-dire qu鈥檌l n鈥檃 pas le droit de proposer des lois et qu鈥檌l doit attendre que la Commission europ茅enne les propose et les r茅dige. Une Commission europ茅enne compos茅e听de fonctionnaires et de commissaires, qui n鈥檕nt pas la l茅gitimit茅 d茅mocratique du suffrage universel que nous avons ici, nous, au Parlement europ茅en, seule institution europ茅enne 茅lue au suffrage universel direct, la seule d茅mocratiquement l茅gitime, nous n鈥檃vons pas le pouvoir de proposer des lois.

Nous sommes parlementaires et nous sommes oblig茅s de jouer aux lobbyistes vis-脿-vis de la Commission europ茅enne pour la pousser 脿 proposer les lois que les citoyens qui nous ont听茅lus souhaitent voir adopt茅es, en esp茅rant que Sa Majest茅 la Commission europ茅enne ait听la gentillesse d鈥檃ccepter de proposer un projet de directive sur les questions attendues et听demand茅es par nos 茅lecteurs.

Vous savez, il y a deux ans, j鈥檃i d茅cid茅 de le prendre, ce droit d鈥檌nitiative, et de r茅diger une proposition de directive, parce que j鈥檈n avais marre d鈥檃ttendre une proposition de la Commission europ茅enne qui 茅tait annonc茅e et qui tardait 脿 arriver. C鈥櫭﹖ait sur la question des travailleurs des plateformes num茅riques. Je savais que 莽a n鈥檃vait pas de valeur l茅gislative, mais c鈥櫭﹖ait en quelque sorte ma fa莽on 脿 moi de faire du lobbying. Vous n鈥檌maginez pas les r茅actions: c鈥櫭﹖ait original, inattendu, disruptif鈥� Que les d茅put茅s europ茅ens proposent des lois ne doit plus 锚tre original ou disruptif. Au contraire. C鈥檈st pourquoi il faut donner un vrai droit d鈥檌nitiative g茅n茅rale au Parlement europ茅en.

听听M谩rton Gy枚ngy枚si (NI). 鈥� Mr President, colleagues, we are discussing a draft report that attempts to rectify a long鈥攕tanding anachronism, a taboo and an absurdity: the only European institution directly elected by the people, hence attaining the highest legitimacy by democratic standards and yet stripped of its right to initiate legislation.

If there ever was a justification for this farce, recent historical and geopolitical developments have certainly showed the need for change. I hear the critics of this proposal who are trying to convince us that European sovereignty is a fiction, that a stronger 合法博彩网站 is a threat to national sovereignty and a 肠耻濒鈥攄别鈥攕补肠. Such critics have a vested interest in upholding the status quo: a weak parliament without a right to initiative; a weak and appointed Commission prone to blackmail; and a weak Council subjected to internal deadlocks due to national vetoes.

Colleagues, it鈥檚 time to get the priorities and balance amongst our institutions right. Adopting this report is a step in that direction.

听听Sven Simon (PPE). 鈥� Herr Pr盲sident! Gestatten Sie mir zwei Vorbemerkungen: Zum ersten m枚chte ich Herrn Kollegen Rangel darin unterst眉tzen, dass es kritikw眉rdig ist, dass diese Debatte wieder vor leeren R盲ngen stattfindet. Es muss diesem Parlament jetzt endlich gelingen, dass wir Debatten f眉hren, wo die Kolleginnen und Kollegen anwesend sind, damit es einen Austausch gibt.

Zweitens, Herr Pr盲sident, m枚chte ich Sie darum bitten, dass im Pr盲sidium mal dar眉ber gesprochen wird, dass Kommission und Rat nicht immer die Redezeit so ausdehnen k枚nnen. Heute war das jetzt nur relativ kurz, aber das f眉hrt dazu, dass wir keine Zwischeninterventionen gestatten, und das brauchen wir auch f眉r eine lebendige Debatte; und h盲ufig 眉berziehen Rat und Kommission deutlich. Das war jetzt heute nicht so stark, aber jedenfalls grunds盲tzlich.

On the file, colleagues, I would like to thank Paulo Rangel, as the rapporteur, for an excellent report that is up for a vote here tomorrow. 合法博彩网站 definitely needs a right of initiative. But my experience, colleagues, is that we don鈥檛 need it so much, primarily, to initiate new legislation; we rather need it to amend and revoke existing legislation, because when I am in my constituency and citizens tell me that the regulation has gone too far, or that a citizen is perhaps disproportionately affected by one or two provisions, then the only thing that we can do as Members of 合法博彩网站 is to write a letter to the Commission. And for that reason, I think the most important argument for having a right of initiative is that we can amend and revoke legislation.

听听Dom猫nec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). 鈥� Se帽or presidente, quiero dar las gracias al vicepresidente Maro拧 艩ef膷ovi膷 y a su equipo y, por supuesto, al ponente de este informe, Paulo Rangel, y al resto de miembros del equipo negociador por este excelente informe, que es adem谩s muy oportuno, como se ha dicho.

Ma帽ana tambi茅n votaremos la Resoluci贸n que hemos negociado entre todos para activar el art铆culo 48, el que nos debe conducir 鈥攁s铆 lo esperamos, con apoyo de al menos una mayor铆a de catorce Estados miembros en el Consejo Europeo鈥� a la convenci贸n y a la reforma de los Tratados.

Y, efectivamente, lo ha dicho el vicepresidente, se est谩 poniendo en marcha, ya existe un cierto derecho de iniciativa legislativa del Parlamento indirecto, en la medida en que la Comisi贸n efectivamente ha adoptado este compromiso de presentar propuestas legislativas sobre la base de nuestros informes de iniciativa.

Pero ciertamente hay que ir m谩s all谩 y eso va a requerir la reforma de nuestro Tratado. 驴Por qu茅? Porque si queremos 鈥攃omo creo que la gran mayor铆a aqu铆 lo deseamos鈥� una democracia europea plena, es necesario reforzar el Parlamento Europeo, que es precisamente la C谩mara que elegimos directamente los ciudadanos en las elecciones al Parlamento Europeo.

En ese sentido, si vemos la trayectoria hist贸rica del Parlamento Europeo 鈥攏o olvidemos que empez贸 siendo una asamblea consultiva, que no aprobaba los proyectos de ley y que inicialmente solo aprobaba el presupuesto鈥�, entonces, el pr贸ximo paso en esa evoluci贸n hist贸rica es precisamente lo que ha propuesto Paulo Rangel: que tenga un derecho propio de iniciativa legislativa. Esto, adem谩s, es particularmente importante si tenemos en cuenta el plan de recuperaci贸n, que tambi茅n plantea el dilema democr谩tico de qui茅n aprueba las emisiones de deuda de la Uni贸n Europea y qui茅n aprueba los recursos propios de la Uni贸n Europea.

听听Charles Goerens (Renew). 鈥� Monsieur le Pr茅sident, depuis听1979, le Parlement a d没 lutter听pour toutes les pr茅rogatives qu鈥檌l d茅tient aujourd鈥檋ui. On est parti de rien, on 茅tait une听acad茅mie, et aujourd鈥檋ui on est un vrai centre de d茅cision politique. Et, 脿 l鈥櫭﹑oque, le droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative n鈥櫭﹖ait pas 脿 l鈥檕rdre du jour. Il aura fallu plusieurs l茅gislatures pour se voir accorder, enfin, un d茅but de droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative. Mais on peine 脿 d茅passer le stade embryonnaire, en la mati猫re.

Quant aux possibles voies de听r茅alisation du droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative, ma pr茅f茅rence va clairement au changement de听trait茅. Si l鈥檕n donne une issue favorable au rapport听Rangel, cela mettra fin 脿 un retard que nous avons par rapport aux parlements nationaux. Dans mon pays, le parlement national dispose du droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative, comme c鈥檈st le cas dans听la plupart des parlements des 脡tats membres de l鈥橴nion europ茅enne. Mais le droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative n鈥檈st pas r茅serv茅 aux seuls d茅put茅s. M锚me les chambres professionnelles, qui sont partie int茅grante du processus l茅gislatif, ont le droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative. S鈥檃gissant de mon pays, la Chambre professionnelle des travailleurs, par exemple, dispose de听60听% de non-Luxembourgeois et de听40听% de Luxembourgeois. M锚me听cet organe, qui est minoritairement luxembourgeois, dispose du droit d鈥檌nitiative l茅gislative.

Alors mettons fin 脿 cet anachronisme qui consiste 脿 refuser au Parlement europ茅en ce qui est normal pour les parlements nationaux.

听听Grace O'Sullivan (Verts/ALE). 鈥� Mr President, 鈥榙emocratic deficit鈥� is the term used by people who argue that the EU institutions and their decision-making procedures suffer from a lack of democracy and seem inaccessible to citizens. In the European 合法博彩网站, we, some 705 elected MEPs, represent the EU鈥檚 448听million citizens in the only directly elected EU institution and as part of one of the largest democratic assemblies in the world.

While the role of the European 合法博彩网站 has been progressively enhanced through the recent treaties, we have always believed that there should be a further strengthening of 合法博彩网站鈥檚 power by way of the right to initiate legislation. Such a right to initiate is a commonplace in parliamentary systems throughout the world.

The Conference on the Future of Europe has been a worthy democratic exercise. To give effect to the conclusions of the conference and to strengthen democracy, we must progress the right of this 合法博彩网站 to initiate legislation.

听听Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). 鈥� Voorzitter, collega's, het voorstel over een recht van initiatief voor het Europees Parlement is de zoveelste poging om van de EU een superstaat te maken, met als argument dat dit Parlement de enige rechtstreeks verkozen EU-instelling is. En dat laatste mag dan zo zijn, maar ook de ministers in de Raad staan allemaal onder democratisch toezicht, namelijk dat van hun eigen nationale parlement.

De vraag is dus niet: 鈥淏en je voor of tegen een versterking van de democratie?鈥�

De vraag is: 鈥淗oe verdelen wij in Europa de macht?鈥�

Ben je voor een superstaat, dan centraliseer je zoveel mogelijk macht en dus ook het initiatiefrecht hier in het Europees Parlement.

Ben je echter voor een Europa van samenwerkende lidstaten, dan investeer je juist in de democratische sturing via de Raad en de nationale parlementen.

En ik kies met overtuiging voor dat laatste. Het moet ons niet gaan om de macht, maar om de vraag: 鈥淗oe kunnen wij de samenleving het beste dienen?鈥�

听听Helmut Scholz (The Left). 鈥� Herr Pr盲sident, Herr Vizepr盲sident! Danke, Herr Berichterstatter, f眉r das unverzagte Festhalten an diesem Dossier. Endlich stimmen wir nach Jahren von Diskussionen unsere Positionen zur Durchsetzung des Kernst眉cks repr盲sentativer Demokratien ab, gerade rechtzeitig, um aus den Empfehlungen der Zukunftskonferenz听鈥� in denen dies ausdr眉cklich auch von den B眉rgerinnen und B眉rgern als Schwachstelle des Funktionierens der EU ausgemacht wurde听鈥� reale politische Aktionen abzuleiten.

Lassen Sie mich erg盲nzend zu den vielen richtigen und klaren Positionen und Aspekten unserer heutigen Debatte und auch in dem Bericht formulieren: Wir wollen kein Initiativrecht zweiter Klasse, also abh盲ngig von den anderen Institutionen sein. Nein, wir beanspruchen kein Gnadenrecht, sondern gleiches Recht听鈥� nicht f眉r uns, sondern entsprechend der repr盲sentativen Demokratie f眉r alle B眉rgerinnen und B眉rger quer durch die EU听27. Dieses Recht auf Gesetzgebung zu allen Themen unseres gesellschaftlichen Miteinander in der EU muss in den Vertr盲gen verankert sein. Darunter geht es nicht.

听听L谩szl贸 Tr贸cs谩nyi (NI). 鈥� Tisztelt Eln枚k 脷r! Az Eur贸pai Parlament arra hivatkozva, hogy tagjait k枚zvetlen眉l v谩lasztj谩k meg, t枚bb jogot k枚vetelne mag谩nak, mint amennyit a tag谩llamok 谩ltal elfogadott Szerz艖d茅sek jelenleg biztos铆tanak neki. Elismerem, hogy nincs olyan int茅zm茅ny, amely ne k铆v谩nna t枚bb jogos铆tv谩nyt, ez az int茅zm茅nyek term茅szet茅b艖l fakad. Abban nem lehet vita, hogy a szuverenit谩s hordoz贸ja a nemzeti parlamentek 茅s nem az Eur贸pai Parlament. Ez茅rt t茅ved茅s 茅s hiba lenne p谩rhuzamba 谩ll铆tani az eur贸pai 茅s nemzeti parlamenteket.

Ha az Eur贸pai Parlament 谩ltal谩nos jogalkot谩si kezdem茅nyez茅si jogk枚rt kapna, akkor azzal az Eur贸pai Bizotts谩g jogos铆tv谩nyait csorb铆tan谩. M谩sfel艖l el艖revet铆ten茅 a tag谩llami 茅rdekek csorbul谩s谩t. Ezzel az int茅zm茅nyi egyens煤ly borulna meg, amely szemben 谩ll a jelenleg hat谩lyos Szerz艖d茅sek c茅lj谩val 茅s szellemis茅g茅vel.

V茅gezet眉l szeretn茅m megk茅rdezni, hogy mit keres ebben a jelent茅sben a magyarorsz谩gi jog谩llamis谩g k茅rd茅se. Ahogy mi, magyarok mondjuk, mit keres a csizma az asztalon. A felesleges ideol贸giai vit谩k helyett helyesebb lenne a val贸di probl茅m谩kra koncentr谩lni.

听听Salvatore De Meo (PPE). 鈥� Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, come possiamo spiegare ai nostri cittadini che noi, pur essendo l'unico organo istituzionale democraticamente e direttamente eletto da loro, non abbiamo il potere di iniziativa legislativa? Purtroppo 猫 difficile spiegarlo e negli anni questa anomalia ha contribuito ad alimentare anche il sentimento antieuropeo.

Con la Conferenza sul futuro dell'Europa i cittadini hanno accolto con entusiasmo la possibilit脿 di esprimere le proprie preoccupazioni e sono stati chiari su ci貌 che si aspettano: pi霉 efficienza e pi霉 partecipazione democratica. Le conclusioni della Conferenza hanno evidenziato la necessit脿 di una modifica dei trattati e, considerata l'espressione democratica del Parlamento, va da s茅 come il riconoscimento ad esso dell'iniziativa legislativa sia il primo passo da compiere per conferire all'Unione europea una maggiore legittimit脿 democratica e una forte credibilit脿 tra i cittadini.

脠 vero che il futuro dell'Europa 猫 nelle mani dei cittadini, ma 猫 a noi parlamentari europei che hanno delegato il compito di rappresentarli affinch茅 le loro richieste ed aspettative si traducano in soluzioni e provvedimenti concreti.

听听Cyrus Engerer (S&D). 鈥� Sur President, nele摹摹u parlamentari biex inwasslu l-messa摹摹 tag魔na u jie魔du azzjoni. Sew jekk nag魔mlu dan fil-parlamenti lokali, re摹jonali jew inkella nazzjonali tag魔na. L-istess g魔andu japplika g魔al dan il-Parlament, il-Parlament tal-Ewropej kollha.

I偶da a魔na l-uniku parlament ming魔ajr id-dritt ta' inizjattiva; ma nistg魔ux inressqu l-li摹ijiet illi jistennew minna 膵-膵ittadini, b魔alma qalulna fil-Konferenza dwar il-Futur tal-Ewropa. Ir-realtajiet ta膵-膵ittadini g魔andhom ji摹u mismug魔a. A魔na l-parlamentari f'kuntatt kontinwu man-nies fil-bliet u l-ir魔ula tag魔na. Nafu x'inhuma l-kwistjonijiet u l-isfidi li jixtiequ li ji摹u indirizzati fuq livell Ewropew. U 膵-膵ittadini jafdaw lill-Parlament biex iressaq 'il quddiem l-isfidi tag魔hom. Wie魔ed biss biss jista' j魔ares lejn il-petizzjonijiet li nir膵ievu; 1573听petizzjoni f'sena wa魔da biss, g魔aliex i膵-膵ittadini jridu li dan il-Parlament itejjeb il-魔ajja tag魔hom. Il-petizzjonijiet huma evidenza ta' kemm nistg魔u niksbu g魔a膵-膵ittadini Ewropej jekk ikollna demokrazija li tiffunzjona fit-totalit脿 tag魔ha. A魔na kapa膵i, lesti u 魔erqana sabiex immexxu 'l quddiem proposti le摹i偶lattivi li huma ambizzju偶i u innovattivi. Il-Kummissjoni u l-Kunsill, meta se jsa魔魔u d-demokrazija Ewropea?

听听Maite Pagazaurtund煤a (Renew). 鈥� Se帽or presidente, en primer lugar, much铆simas gracias al se帽or Rangel por el maravilloso trabajo realizado. Aqu铆 se habla una y otra vez de la Conferencia sobre el Futuro de Europa y de que los ciudadanos, con mucha naturalidad, piden la iniciativa legislativa para el Parlamento Europeo. 驴Es por un capricho? No. Es porque no viven en una burbuja; es porque quieren soluciones r谩pidas a problemas reales y saben que el Parlamento Europeo est谩 preparado y es maduro para poder hacer parte de ese trabajo que ahora no podemos hacer. Tan sencillo como eso.

Hoy por hoy, el derecho de iniciativa legislativa est谩 reservado casi en exclusiva a la Comisi贸n Europea. Nosotros podemos pedir, pero se nos hace caso o no. La Comisi贸n Europea puede ignorarnos perfectamente y nosotros no somos el escal贸n de un lobby de influencia para que la Comisi贸n Europea decida si s铆 o si no. Creo que estamos maduros, somos responsables para hacer frente a muchos problemas y desaf铆os transnacionales. As铆 que, si hay alguien escuchando del Consejo 鈥攁l que no vemos aqu铆鈥� pedimos que nos escuche.

El ciudadano ha sido muy claro en la Conferencia. Nos ha pedido que nosotros tambi茅n tengamos ese derecho de iniciativa directo. Y lo hacen por lo que digo: no viven en una burbuja. Tenemos retos de 茅poca, complicaciones en el futuro que nos viene; as铆 que, tenemos una oportunidad 煤nica para introducir cambios. Es el momento de convocar una Convenci贸n y de hacer ver al Consejo 鈥攓ue no est谩鈥� que revisar los Tratados para reconocer este derecho es algo positivo y necesario.

听听Marcel Kolaja (Verts/ALE). 鈥� Mr President, dear Vice鈥擯resident 艩ef膷ovi膷, absent Council, dear colleagues, the European 合法博彩网站 is the only directly elected European institution, yet it is not allowed to initiate legislation. Representatives directly elected by the European citizens have only partial tools at their disposal to suggest proposals, and these are often disregarded, thrown away or heavily postponed by the Commission. Let鈥檚 be fair about that fact.

Hence, I will count on the support of the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, for the European 合法博彩网站鈥檚 right to initiate legislation. Nevertheless, declared support needs to be followed by actions. All 705 Members are directly elected to represent people in Brno, Ko拧ice, Dubrovnik and everywhere else. We are the direct voice of European citizens and therefore we should have the right to initiate legislation to fully represent and defend our citizens鈥� interests.

As a matter of fact, citizens asked for it in the Conference on the Future of Europe. I would like to ask the Council what the Member States plan to do about it.

(The President cut off the speaker)

听听Eugenia Rodr铆guez Palop (The Left). 鈥� Se帽or presidente, el Parlamento Europeo es la 煤nica instituci贸n de la Uni贸n Europea cuyos miembros son elegidos por sufragio directo. Sin embargo, los 谩mbitos en los que puede ejercer el derecho de iniciativa son sumamente limitados y evidencian un desequilibrio entre las instancias que debe corregirse.

El Consejo se niega a negociar el derecho de investigaci贸n, dispone de una mayor capacidad legislativa 鈥攁 pesar de representar los intereses nacionales y no los del conjunto de la Uni贸n鈥� y a menudo bloquea los avances parlamentarios. Quienes quieren volver al Estado naci贸n deber铆an tomar nota de este detalle.

Lo cierto es que el Parlamento es la instancia europea por definici贸n, porque es donde reside el cuerpo y el altavoz de la ciudadan铆a. Y es, adem谩s, el espacio m谩s deliberativo y hoy el m谩s progresista. Merecer铆a tener una capacidad legislativa directa y real.

Los Estados han sido ya superados por la propia medida de las cosas. Los retos que nos aguardan exigen descentralizaci贸n y federalismo, diferentes instancias pol铆ticas coordinadas entre las que se distribuyan las competencias para tomar decisiones. Hoy, m谩s que nunca, es imprescindible la capilaridad, la pluralidad y la voz matizada del Parlamento Europeo.

听听Caterina Chinnici (S&D). 鈥� Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Parlamento europeo, l'unica istituzione dell'Unione eletta direttamente dai cittadini, non ha un diritto generale di iniziativa legislativa come invece i parlamenti nazionali. Un'architettura istituzionale atipica, quindi, che rappresenta un evidente deficit democratico, difficilmente comprensibile per i cittadini europei.

Tale disequilibrio istituzionale si avverte in particolare nell'ambito dello spazio di libert脿, sicurezza e giustizia, in cui il Consiglio europeo definendo, ai sensi dell'articolo 68 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione, le strategie della programmazione legislativa ed operativa, dispone di fatto di un diritto di iniziativa in materie tutte sensibili che impattano direttamente sulle libert脿 fondamentali dei cittadini europei.

Dotare il Parlamento europeo del diritto di iniziativa legislativa, come 猫 pure richiesto dalla Conferenza sul futuro dell'Europa, rafforzer脿 anche l'azione dell'Unione nel prevenire e contrastare fenomeni di arretramento del rispetto dei diritti fondamentali e dello Stato di diritto, a maggiore tutela dei cittadini europei.

听听Juan Fernando L贸pez Aguilar (S&D). 鈥� Se帽or presidente, el Parlamento Europeo es la 煤nica instituci贸n directamente elegida y legitimada por el voto de la arquitectura europea. Es un verdadero Parlamento, pero es m谩s: es el 煤nico parlamento multinacional con poderes legislativos de todo el mundo. Es un Parlamento legislador, y es un verdadero Parlamento porque inviste a la Comisi贸n en la persona de su presidenta con su voto, controla a dicha instituci贸n y puede derribarla tambi茅n con su voto.

Por eso resulta inexorable que el Parlamento Europeo 鈥攍a instituci贸n que m谩s ha crecido en el curso de la historia de la Uni贸n Europea鈥� complete su proceso de maduraci贸n y crecimiento con esa iniciativa legislativa directa. No es verdad que no la tenga en absoluto; la tiene de manera indirecta. Puede ordenar, mandatar a la Comisi贸n que adopte iniciativas legislativas.

Pero hay tres maneras de mejorar la actual situaci贸n. La primera: que la Comisi贸n se obligue, cada vez que el Parlamento Europeo adopta un informe de iniciativa, a responder y traer la iniciativa que le ha ordenado el Parlamento Europeo.

La segunda: un acuerdo institucional 鈥斅玦nterinstitucional禄, lo llamamos鈥� que refuerce la posici贸n y la opini贸n del Parlamento en los procedimientos legislativos especiales.

Pero la tercera es la inevitable: es la reforma 鈥攅n virtud del art铆culo 48 del Tratado de la Uni贸n Europea鈥� que complete este proceso de maduraci贸n final del Parlamento Europeo con la iniciativa legislativa directa.

听听President. 鈥� Colleagues, at 17.00 we have the next voting session. I hope it is in your interest to finalise this debate before. That is the reason why I cannot accept the rest for catch-the-eye. So I will cancel catch-the-eye and I will give the floor to Vice-President 艩ef膷ovi膷.

听听Maro拧 艩ef膷ovi膷, Vice-President of the Commission. 鈥� Mr President, honourable Members, I see that Members are gathering for another voting session and I know that time is running out, so I will be indeed very short.

First and foremost, I really would like to thank all of you for this very important debate. I think it gave very clear confirmation that there is a strong wish for 合法博彩网站 to have a more important role in the area that we discussed this afternoon, and that it clearly warrants the need for the Commission and 合法博彩网站 to continue working even more together from an early stage when the initiatives are being prepared in the committees.

I really would like to underscore that I very much appreciate your acknowledgement that this Commission delivers on our political commitment to work with you and to deliver on the Article 225 resolution, and that we are ready to further discuss how we can improve the practical aspects of our positive cooperation, an experience we had in this effort so far.

I also would like to underline that I understand that you call for a more generalised direct right of initiative of the European 合法博彩网站. I think that there was also a quite clear understanding from most of the intervening Members of the 合法博彩网站 that such a broad right would require a treaty change, which of course merits a wider debate.

So, to conclude, I would like to thank all the honourable Members who intervened in this discussion and to underline once again that we are ready to continue our discussions on this matter.

听听Paulo Rangel, rapporteur. 鈥� Mr听President, so to conclude our debate, I would like to say first that there is no point in the argument that we are trying to build a superstate. If you acknowledge 鈥� and all of you acknowledge because you vote in ECR and in ID, you vote in every opportunity that you have 鈥� that we have legislative competence and legislative powers, then, of course, there is no reason not to have the right of initiative. Either you start to retire from this Chamber and do not vote, and then, of course, you are coherent, or if you do not do that, of course you should acknowledge the right of initiative.

Then let me say to the Vice-President of the Commission, I was very pleased with your intervention, but I would like to have a clear statement (which, by the way, your President, Ms听von der Leyen, has made) that we are entitled to have the proper right of initiative. That was what I was expecting today because this was said by President听von听der听Leyen. There is no reason for a Vice-President that is responsible for institutional relations not to say that here in a very clear and open manner.

And finally, I would take this opportunity while I have here some presidents of groups to tell you that it is a shame that our 合法博彩网站 in such matters like electoral law, triggering Article听48 and the right of initiative doesn鈥檛 schedule these debates as key debates, because the other institutions will say, you are debating, you are debating the right of initiative, but you give only a very, very short slot in the evening to debate this. And the same will happen tomorrow with the triggering of Article 48. This doesn鈥檛 honour our Chamber, and it鈥檚 the responsibility of the Conference of Presidents that we don鈥檛 have the institutional issues among the most important debates of our House.

听听Der Pr盲sident. 鈥� Ich glaube, dass die Debatte sehr deutlich gezeigt hat, dass es eine breite Mehrheit in diesem Parlament f眉r ein Initiativrecht gibt.

Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet morgen, Donnerstag, 9.听Juni 2022, statt.