Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-16-Speech-4-117"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001116.5.4-117"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"We will certainly not dispute the benefits of “the promotion of electricity from renewable energy sources”. All the better if, as an added bonus, this leads to the creation of 500 000 jobs, as the report states.
Nor do we have any problem with the idea of giving support to research in this field or even the use of these sources of electricity, so that consumers will not hesitate to choose them over electricity produced by more pollutant processes.
But why should support also involve private profit? That is the case today, because the proposed subsidies would go to private companies involved in research or marketing, including trusts such as Total Energie, Shell Solaire, ABB Alstom Power, Dalkia, a subsidiary of Vivendi, Arthur Andersen, Tiru, a joint subsidiary of Suez-Lyonnaise des eaux and Vivendi, and other industrial groups that make enough profit as it is without the need to turn to the taxpayer yet again.
Electricity production and distribution ought to be a public service. So why could the States or the European institutions not take over this public service as a regional authority and hire the necessary 500 000 workers directly? The savings that would result from not having to pay out profits to the shareholders of a private firm would allow the workers to be paid proper wages and provide a decent public electricity service."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples