Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-18-Speech-5-044"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000218.3.5-044"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I want to support this proposal on principle while asking right at the outset whether the previous speaker’s statement that on the one hand we need an innovative and highly effective and competitive service while on the other hand this service should be a public service, is not a contradiction in terms.
I think ours is a different approach! European policy has liberalised monopoly markets – energy, telecommunications and air transport – and the target, the focus, was always the consumer. The aim was simply to offer a better service and also to put the emphasis on the user in liberalising the postal services. I think the consumer can decide for himself and define in advance what he needs. He does not need a government to do so, or a parliament, nor does he need a Commission to do so!
The postal market is limping along behind and, sadly, we have wasted valuable time here. I believe we should give the postal service a chance to adapt to new trends. I am thinking here of the very sound words of Mr Rübig, who also talked about e-commerce. That will develop very quickly and present the various undertakings in our society with new challenges; we will have to adapt very flexibly and rapidly to these challenges.
I believe a liberalised market will speed up this process more than a less liberalised market. It also offers some prospect of conveying a positive picture of European policy. We should seize that opportunity, for the citizen keeps asking, why do we have Europe? These are areas where the citizen can see and understand the benefit of Europe.
I am glad Mr Monti, the Commissioner for competition, is here today in person, for he is pursuing an excellent policy. And here I want to turn to an area where in my view – and this is a point also made in this debate – Parliament and the Commission must consider where to draw limits to competition. We are in favour of competition as a component of the social market economy, and of course we are also in favour of it because we want this economic system to be as successful as possible.
Yet I believe that, as this debate has shown, we have to discuss the limits to competition in some areas. So I would ask you to give an impetus in that direction, together with Parliament. I have mentioned the example of social services before: nowadays we can reduce everything to attracting the customer, including the pensioner in an old people’s home, and the question is whether we want to subject all that to competition, whether that is the right course. I believe we should use this legislative term to determine the limits, the positive aspects of competition. For competition is not an end in itself; it is there to serve of the citizen, the consumer, which is why we should consider the areas in which we do not want it."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples