Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-27-Speech-3-151"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991027.5.3-151"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, right at the outset I would like to say to Mr Helmer and others that people on this side of the House are not in the business of shackling or hampering the decision-making capabilities of businesses.
What we would like to do is to encourage them to look after their investors. But when I talk about investors I am not just talking about shareholders. I also mean the thousand of workers in companies like Michelin who invested their time, energy, knowledge, skills, their hopes and aspirations, and those of their families, in the company they have worked for for many years. I mean the investment of the communities that underpin and sustain them. I mean, as well, all of us here and out there in the rest of the European Union as taxpayers. Public money, directly or indirectly, is involved in these enterprises; regional, national and European money and, as Mr Nobilia said a short while ago, it should not come without strings attached.
A good company will look after its workforce. It will work in partnership with its workforce and it will encourage involvement, partnership and innovation. A good company will not treat its workforce or the community housing it as factors of production to be disposed of lightly in a global game of profit and loss.
We in this House have become accustomed to the idea of externalities in environmental policy, with the bill for the costs of dirty practices being picked up not by the enterprise in question, but by society more broadly. Perhaps we need to think in similar terms when it comes to the social responsibilities of enterprises like Michelin. Otherwise the danger is that the main burden will only be upon the shareholders.
We clearly have an imbalance within the European Union. On the one hand, considerable freedom for companies to restructure and move but very few rights for the workers involved. Even where we have rights in European legislation, rights for example to be consulted well in advance about decisions on collective redundancies or other major changes affecting livelihoods, the law is not being properly observed or applied. We need to revisit that.
We have a number of outstanding issues to tackle at European level. We need to review and improve the law on individual and collective dismissals and on works councils. We need a general framework on information and consultation and we also need a review of the law on transfers, mergers and take-overs – not involved here but in the banking and insurance sector for example.
The 12% rise in the share value of Michelin in the days following the announcement shows what a cynical and deliberate manipulation of the stock market was involved here. I find that totally reprehensible and I hope all right-thinking people in this House will feel the same.
Finally, on a point of order, genuinely a point of order. Mr President, I would draw this to your attention. I signed a resolution, a compromise text, along with others, two days ago. That resolution contained in the final paragraph a reference to Michelin. The resolution which has now been circulated to be voted upon tomorrow no longer contains that reference. Someone in the sessional services has removed it without any reference back to those of us who signed it. That is a very serious matter indeed and I hope you will investigate it fully and report back to this House."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples