Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-09-15-Speech-3-118"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19990915.9.3-118"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The President of the Commission’s intervention sums up all of the committees’ work which provided the opportunity to assess the political positions of the various Commissioners.
On the whole, the fundamental political positions which have been responsible for the current problems were defended, particularly those on unemployment and social exclusion.
The complete lack of confidence that our citizens have in the European institutions, which was clearly demonstrated by the low turnout in the recent elections, requires not only “a modern and efficient administration”, but new policies which will respond positively to the socio-economic problems currently experienced by the European Union’s Member States.
This is why the central features of the positions held are still neo-liberal and federalist policies, although in a few cases, there were hints of social concern in the speeches, but without any concrete suggestions as to how they might be implemented. Only yesterday, Romano Prodi clarified his position when he claimed that it was necessary to “restructure the single market and to promote liberalisation”, and deliberately emphasised the need to continue the process of liberalisation in the goods and service sectors.
If we maintain the criteria of Maastricht and the Stability Pact, the European Employment Pact loses any credibility it might have had, and this, together with the insistence on the flexibility of working conditions makes it clear that what is at stake is an increasing deregulation of working conditions. In turn, no progress has been made on the need to assess the movement of capital, in terms of national social programmes having to adapt to current demographic trends, which proves that, in fact, their objective is not greater social justice, but quite the opposite: greater social inequality.
In the area of farming, there was still an insistence on the great objectives of the CAP – common agricultural policy – and on a greater liberalisation of the markets, which upholds the injustices in the distribution of aid and subsidies, with an obvious bias against family-based farming and against countries such as Portugal where small-holdings represent the most common kind of farming.
Concerning foreign and defence policies, the insistence on the federalist approach was emphasised, as was the strengthening of the CFSP’s militaristic positions, instead of a decisive pledge for policies of co-operation.
These are the main reasons for a vote against the new Commission."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples