Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-03-Speech-2-048"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010703.2.2-048"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as Mr Provan pointed out, the two institutions with responsibility for adopting this directive, Council and Parliament, are divided. In the Council, a minority opposes it and Parliament is divided more or less down the middle, given that in the delegation to the Conciliation Committee, on the final evening of debate, the voting was concluded with 8 votes for and 6 against, with one Member abstaining. I would say that the divisions now also extend to the various political groups. My own Group will decide this afternoon on how it will vote, which means that until tomorrow we will probably not know for sure whether or not the directive will be adopted.
I should like to begin by saying that I disagree with Mr Provan’s assessment of a possible rejection of this directive. Because the problem we face is whether, as a consequence of the directive being adopted, European businesses – as Mr Lehne pointed out – could be held to ransom by the major international financial operators, who are known colloquially as the ‘Sharks of Wall Street’. This is the danger we are currently facing and, as a Member of this Parliament, I state my intention, of course, to vote against the directive, because I believe that the danger of our businesses being devoured by these financial operators, and of being stripped to the bone if they have assets – I am talking here about heavily capitalised companies – immediately condemning workers to unemployment, is much greater than the alternative danger, which is that the operation of the internal market may be impeded. As Mr Lehne pointed out, the Americans themselves have adopted the rather expeditious solution of having at least one State – Delaware – in which highly capitalised companies can be based and where the monitoring of these companies by financial sharks can be prevented.
With regard to public opinion or the press, I also disagree with Mr Provan, because his words do not match what is written in the newspapers that I read. In my opinion, a vote against, at this time, by the European Parliament on an issue as important and significant as this would enhance the prestige of this institution. Because the information that I have from governmental institutions indicates that many governments would probably change their position within the Council if they were aware of the impact of this issue on the business world and, above all, on the unions. Now, in the formula laid down in the proposed directive, the workers are the unwanted guests. The workers are invited to the table but they cannot join in. They cannot take part in the meal and cannot take part in the decision-making. They are simply informed of the decision that is to be taken and, once it is taken, the document provided by the workers is just seen as another document – similar to what the Council does when Parliament has a consultative role – and then the decision is reached without any account being taken of the workers’ opinions. I and most of the Members of the Socialist Group will, therefore, probably vote against adopting this directive."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples