Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-13-Speech-2-137"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011113.7.2-137"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The Commission’s communication of 20 September 2000 on services of general interest in Europe reviews its position in order to take into account recent developments in the case law of the Court of Justice, and also the will of Heads of State, expressed at various European Councils (at Amsterdam and Nice in particular) to show greater respect for the specific nature of the missions of public service.
This new communication, however, pushes us into a difficult position. Apparently brimming with good intentions, the Commission is proposing to define the limits of public services and competition rules, to grant derogations for State aid to activities of general economic benefit, to put in place systems to evaluate the performance of public services and so on. In fact, the Commission is behaving as if the articles of the treaty on competition were universally applicable, and as if it was up to the Commission to say, out of kindness, the extent to which they will be applied. The Commission is giving itself the role of arbitrator. The treaty, however, does not give it any right to do this.
We must, however, be very attentive to the Commission’s attempts to wield imperialist powers. We believe, in particular, that the memorandum issued by France on 27 July 2001, despite being full of good intentions, falls into this trap, by proposing to draft a framework directive to set objectives for services of general economic interest and also the freedoms and obligations of Member States with regard to these. This is another example of a European text that can be interpreted in many different ways and is subject to European arbitration.
In reality, all we need is a new article in the treaty to confirm the evidence, in other words, the sovereign right of Member States to define and organise their public services independently, whether these are general services or services of economic interest."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Although the Treaty of Rome only mentioned public services in passing, this is because those who drafted the treaty thought it went without saying that public services did not fall under European competences. Even Article 16 of the TEC, introduced under the Treaty of Amsterdam, does not amend this position."1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples