Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-175"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-175"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:translated text |
".
The European Union promised Hungary a rapid entry into Europe. However, this promise has not been kept. This is why the report ‘insists (…) on the need to fix firm dates for the conclusion of negotiations and accession – since the Treaty of Nice has now been signed – so as to help forestall any disappointment or even discontent on the part of the Hungarian public’.
Disappointment is becoming the norm, however. The amount of time the process is taking is the main reason for this but also the widespread sacrifices we are trying to pass off as a bitter pill that must be swallowed in order to prepare for a brighter future at the heart of the EU, with certain countries having to swallow this very pill without even any guarantee that they will become full members of the EU.
The fear that people will associate social regression with structural adjustment criteria imposed by the IMF or by the EU is shifting the debate. The report ‘welcomes (…) the approximately 60% rise in the national minimum wages, and calls on the Hungarian government to encourage the signing of collective bargaining agreements by industrial sectors’ yet the substance of the social measures advocated evaporates when the report ‘notes the adoption of a new labour code based on the principle of the flexibility and mobility of labour with a view to adapting the rules and organisation of the labour market to the need for economic growth…’ This is a liberal formula that we do not accept, either for the new candidate countries or for the European Union as it stands today. For these reasons, we were not able to vote for this report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples