Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-27-Speech-3-085"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020227.6.3-085"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"My group has long been critical of the Lisbon process, not least because of its unquestioning belief in economic growth per se, with no attempt at any qualitative evaluation of it at all, yet we still cling to this as a key indicator of economic wellbeing and assume that that means social wellbeing as well. If I have to fence my house, put up burglar alarms, catches on the windows, etc., it may be good for the economy, but it is not good for my quality of life. We also criticise the ambition about being the most competitive knowledge-based economy, on the basis that in any competition, there are going to be losers, both within the European Union and globally.
What we are looking at with Lisbon is that we have to beware that social cohesion, which was another of the goals, does not become a casualty of our search for competitiveness. We are also very much aware that Lisbon is not enough. Gothenburg added the environment and the promise of Spring summits, which Barcelona is, as sustainability summits. In my group's view, all summits should be about sustainability, but I would settle for at least one a year as a start because the environment underpins our economic development, and if you do not have sustainability, you can kiss goodbye to the stability pact.
Mr Bullmann's original report gave us a comprehensive reminder of a number of issues concerning employment, social cohesion and the importance of sustainability, but I think we saw considerable tension introduced with that report, with certain EMAC resolutions; not least, paragraph 25 and its push for liberalisation with no qualitative evaluation on the social and environmental side whatsoever, and paragraph 36, which tells us that the European Union did a very good job at Doha in our push for the liberalisation of world trade as the catalyst for international growth. We have to get away from this idea that sustainable growth somehow means 3% year after year, if that is going to eat up our finite resources and pollute our environment. We have to decide as a European Union what we mean by sustainable economic growth and it is not what we are voting about here."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples