Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-04-Speech-3-145"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010704.3.3-145"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"In January 2001, the Swedish presidency of the European Union modestly announced three priorities: the environment, enlargement and employment. Six months later, with the Gothenburg Council, we have to acknowledge failure.
In employment, this period was marked by a huge wave of redundancies in large transnational groups that are making millions of euros in profits, like Marks [amp] Spencer and Danone. The EU has once again proved unable to counterbalance the dictatorship of the markets and shareholders, for example by introducing a tax on speculation – such as the ‘Tobin tax’ – by strengthening employees’ and citizens’ rights of economic control or by introducing European-level legislation banning redundancies.
In relation to enlargement, the only prospect opened to the candidate countries is quite simply for their economy to be absorbed into the single market. At no moment will the people concerned be consulted on either the contents or the implications of accession. Yet the Irish ‘no’ vote shows once again that Europe cannot be built without the people and without their support for a democratic, political and social project.
Finally, at international level, the European Union has shown itself unable to make a positive contribution to resolving conflicts, notably by imposing a just and lasting peace in Palestine on Israel.
The Swedish presidency will be marked mainly by the provocative police actions that punctuated the Gothenburg summit. Instead of embarking as they should on a thorough review of the European projects, the governments, from their bunker, have for the first time turned to violence and fired on the demonstrators. We urgently need a different Europe: a Europe based on democracy and social progress. That is why we voted against the joint motion for a resolution."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples