Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-18-Speech-4-206"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000518.7.4-206"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Europe has become strong and we have learnt how to build bridges over the last 50 years. We have paid very great attention to the social dialogue, which means talking with each other, examining problems and understanding each other. Social partnership is an ideal model centred on partners who interact with each other and help each other. We should also all be concerned about integration, about good neighbourliness. We should endeavour to provide incentives and to act as a model. I believe that in human society acting as a model is a particularly important characteristic. Particularly as an Austrian, I can say that in recent years, with a population of 7 million, we have accepted a million refugees. We are therefore the European country that has accepted most refugees per inhabitant. We were a kind of life-raft in Europe, and we still are today. We fight against extremism on both the left and the right, as well as against violence. Austria has the world’s strictest laws against fascism and against nazism. We have learnt some lessons from history and we know how to fight these things. We are now talking about discrimination. First and foremost, I am speaking on behalf of small- and medium-sized enterprises. We must make sure that we do not rob companies of working time and jeopardise their success by forcing them to spend more time on statistical form filling. When I visit companies I often hear the complaint that there is too much bureaucracy and too many formalities. Form filling is, of course, a very inefficient kind of work. If, in addition, there are inspections, this also takes time and I believe that the vast majority of companies behave in a proper and decent way, and that relations between employers and employees are generally very good. That is why I also believe that cancelling public contracts can also be provocative, and I am returning to the key issue now: reversing the burden of proof will have a knock-on effect if it is implemented. It will encourage abuse. People will need to protect themselves against such abuse. It will be necessary to keep more evidence. It will lead to risk limitation, by which I mean surveillance methods, video recordings and tape transcripts. Everyone will try to protect themselves as well as possible so that if they are taken to court they can provide evidence. I can see great dangers here and we must ensure that they are averted."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph