Questions for Commissioner McCreevy regarding Council "adoption"
-> [ Collected questions | Questions Council | Presidency Position | Council Rules Exerpt | Patent News ]
Collection of questions that could be asked to Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. Please add yours.
"Adoption"
- If it appears that there are no procedural reasons to argue that a political agreement always leads to a common position, can we say that the Presidency has misguided the Commission?
- What do you think is the control function of National Parliaments in the Council process? The text was changed at the 18 May meeting, so the national parliaments only were able to voice their opinion after the political agreement had been reached. Additionally, before the changed on 18 May 2004 there was no qualified majority supporting the text, and this text is substantially the same as what came out of that meeting.
- Are you aware that Frits Bolkestein cheated the Council when he proposed the German proposal as amended by the Commoission "in a slight technical way".
- He was referring to the change of "technical field" into "field of technology", not to the removal of half the text
- Why are your recent speeches like cut's paste versions of Bolkesteins ones? Don't you have an opinion on your own?
- What do you think to achieve with insulting flamebait like that?
this is a brainstroning site, do not comment --> everything can be worded in a polite way.
Second Reading
- Are you aware that your statements about the second reading are cynical given the majority needed?
- Why do you want Parliament to kill the Council proposal? Why cannot you accept a good Directive.
- Will the Commission accept an amended proposal by the European Parliament? Why has it not done so after the first reading, when the EP substantially amended the directive?
- Why do you not respect Parliament?
- What do you like about the Council version?
- Bolkestein said he would be cautious to insert Program claims. The Council introduced program claims in deceptive wording, article 5.2. Parliament rejected program claims amendments in the first reading. What is your opinion regarding article 5.2?
Historical
- What, in your opinion, did Microsoft seek to gain by sponsoring the Irish presidency?
- Which department or figures within Microsoft approached the Irish presidency regarding sponsorship?
