A debate devoted to Poland in the European Parliament
The resolution of the European Commission on the application of the first stage of paragraph 7 of the European Union to Poland was discussed. It is reported by Upmp.news with reference to Polish Radio.
Vice-President of the European Commission, France Timmermans, negatively assessed the judicial reform in Poland. At the same time, the politician expressed his hope for a resolution of the dispute with Warsaw by the end of March. The European Parliament concluded a debate on the situation in Poland and the European Commission’s resolution on the application of the first phase of paragraph 7 of the European Union to Poland.
The debate began with a vice chairman of the European Commission, who called the reservations concerning the judicial reform in Poland. France Timmermans also spoke about the serious violation of the rule of law by Warsaw. The European Commission has been holding a dialogue with Warsaw since January. “Dialogue is important, but it can not last without end. Dialogue is beneficial when there are concrete results,” said Fran Timmermans.
Robert Mezzola, speaking on behalf of the Christian Democrats, said that there is a threat to democracy in Poland, “It’s sad that we are gathering in this hall again and talk about the situation in Poland, the country where Solidarity was born”.
Joseph Weidengolzer of the Socialist Group also critically evaluated the situation in Poland: “The introduction of the seventh paragraph is the last signal to the government, which does not notice European reservations. We support the Commission in introducing the seventh paragraph.”
In turn, Richard Lehoutco, speaking on behalf of the conservatives, called inappropriate the debate and the resolution, on which the vote on March 1 will take place: “It is also inappropriate to persecute Poland over the past two years. The overwhelming majority of you do not have the idea of what is happening in Poland, what is the reform and why the government is doing it.” The MEP stressed that judicial reform was necessary.