Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-10-Speech-1-122"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-12-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Report on financial assistance for innovative and job creating SMEs2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011210.6.1-122"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-12-10-Speech-1-1232
lpv:speaker	lp:Chantal Cauquil2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Lutte ouvrière (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; BUDG (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I am going to use my speaking time to contradict the procedural page and the previous speakers who, while claiming that the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs unanimously voted in favour of the Bushill-Matthews report, have attributed to me a vote that expresses the exact opposite of what I believe in. This report is a plea to grant greater financial assistance to small- and medium-sized businesses. I am even more opposed to the idea of giving public money to private businesses since large financial and industrial corporations are often lurking behind the all-encompassing SME cause. It would never strike Mr Bushill-Matthews, who is known for his fervent support of the so-called free market, to propose financial assistance for workers who have been made redundant by the very same industrial and financial corporations or their counterparts. On the contrary, the rapporteur brings out the begging bowl without compunction, so that public money can be shifted, through the SME Guarantee facility or pre-start financing, into the coffers of large corporations so that it ends up swelling the private wealth of shareholders. To prove that Member States and the European institutions are no strangers to a bit of hypocrisy, this increased financial assistance is proposed in the name of job creation. I shall of course vote against this report. Public money should go to public services, to health, education, and public transport, which could and should create many more useful jobs for everyone than these start-ups, which swallow up money without showing how they are of use to society. The health sector has been reduced to collecting public money in order to contend with some diseases. I would like to see employers come round to collect public money. It is not up to Parliament to give taxpayers’ money to help them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph