Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-13-Speech-2-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010213.5.2-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the
(Financial Times) published last Friday, 2 February, carried the front-page headline: “Corus gives a fifth of its workers their marching orders”. A little further on in the financial pages, there was the headline: “Corus experiences sharp upturn”. The contrast in the pictures – it is a shame I cannot show them to you – was almost more telling: on the front page there was a picture of a sad steelworker from Wales, and in the financial pages a graph of how the profits went up when these redundancies were announced. This sort of news is commonplace now. It confronts us with the fundamental question as to what actually motivates businesses these days. Are they only in it for the money or do they have a broader vision and mission?
In the Netherlands, the Socio-Economic Council published two important opinions recently, one about doing business in a socially responsible manner, with the grand title: “The acquisition of values”, and the other was about corporate governance and industrial relations. In its opinions, the Council expressly opts for a broad characterisation of a business as a joint venture between various stakeholders, and so it expressly avoids focusing attention on the creation of shareholder value for the shareholders, who seem to be the main reason behind many of the restructuring operations that have recently taken place.
I see no evidence of this broader perspective or these more fundamental discussions in the European debate. The European Parliament has put this issue on the agenda again today, but this discussion must also filter through into other areas of European policy. To my mind, it lacks coherence in this respect. I will cite two examples. As regards the legislation on partnerships, people argue in completely one-dimensional terms from the perspective of the shareholders. A case in point was the discussion on the thirteenth directive on takeover bids, when Mr Bolkestein well and truly dismissed Parliament’s amendments. Another example can be found in competition policy. Commissioner Monti made it abundantly clear in our Committee on Employment and Social Affairs that he only wants to approach mergers from the point of view of the markets and consumers, and has little interest in the bigger picture.
A Green Paper on corporate social responsibility, as announced this morning, is not enough. I feel the Commission must make it its business to develop a more integrated outlook, and to ensure that this works its way through into the various policy headings. Newspapers may display a certain amount of schizophrenia, but not politicians and policy makers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples