Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-18-Speech-5-032"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-02-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European postal services2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000218.3.5-032"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-02-18-Speech-5-0332
lpv:speaker	lp:Helmuth Markov2
lpv:spokenAs	treasurer; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; BUDG (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I share the view that we need to make more progress from the point of view of efficiency and the analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the services offered. But as an entrepreneur myself, I really cannot understand why it is always assumed this can only be done under the headings of "privatisation" and "liberalisation"! Or perhaps people are not concerned with creating the same conditions of access to the postal services for all, but are thinking only of the capital employment conditions for companies in large conglomerations. Members should however represent all the citizens, which means it is their duty to think not in terms of business management but in terms of the national economy. In practice that means the following for the postal services: firstly, priority must be given to employment. I have nothing against liberalisation and privatisation, but the premises must be right. Secondly, we must guarantee that the citizens are not faced with reduced postal services. Examples in Germany and Sweden show that this certainly is a risk. Mr Stenmarck, Sweden is the only country in which prices rose far higher after liberalisation than in all the other Member States of the European Union. So that is another potential effect and one that we must prevent. Thirdly, it is vital to have, first of all, a universal postal service at an affordable price for all citizens, wherever they may be; secondly, to have a uniform price for all Member States; and thirdly, to have daily mail deliveries and collections on working days. On the question of the cost-effectiveness of the various postage weights, it is worth considering further price cuts; but that is what the postal administration itself is saying. We do not have to adhere to a weight of over 300g when the analysis shows that we need to ensure a minimum weight of 150g to make it at all worthwhile. In that respect I believe it was right and important to hold this debate today, to make Mr Bolkestein aware of Parliament’s position and allow him to take certain aspects into account from the outset."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph