Display:
  1. Lobby MEP so that they reverse the text in first reading with amendments
  2. Council will revert again to the original proposal, commission will applaude and say MEP shouldn't listen to citizens who obviously don't understand anything and fall for commies tricks
  3. Lobby MEP so that they reject the text in second reading.
  4. Next directive, goto 1.
by Laurent GUERBY on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 03:42:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You need to be in the consultation as well though: when you go lobbying MEPs you can tell them that you did make your views clear but they were ignored by the Commission. I suspect most MEPs would sympathise!
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 03:44:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, the commission already ignores MEP views :).

What we found out is that it's about useless to try to reach the commission for a grassroot movement (ut we did participate and petition to commission-organised mascarades. MEP are usually listening to their citizens.

The problem is that MEP only have the power to reject a directive proposal (with quite high difficulty and only in second reading) and nothing else, even if they understand and sympathise with your ideas.

by Laurent GUERBY on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 07:43:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We need to fight at national level as well...
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 08:07:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, the commission already ignores MEP views :).

Not quite...

the rejection of the Council common position is the democratic right of Parliament as co-legislator with the Council. Many speakers during the debate yesterday mentioned the voice of the people and the role of democracy.

Without this directive, patents for computer-implemented inventions will continue to be issued by national patent offices and the European Patent Office under existing law. There will be no harmonisation at EU level.

(Applause)

This means that different interpretations as to what is patentable or not will continue without any judicial control by the European Court of Justice.

Since the adoption of the common position, the Commission has maintained the view that, should Parliament decide to reject the common position, the Commission would respect this and would not present a new proposal but, if Parliament invites us to do so, we will speak with the various parliamentary committees and then consider the next procedures.

Various Members have expressed the view that the Commission should present a non-sector-specific instrument and that it should seek the adoption of the Community patent.



Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 08:09:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Nor in the case of the Bolkenstein Directive.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 12th, 2006 at 08:15:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series