Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-19-Speech-4-030"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-12-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Services of general interest in Europe2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021219.2.4-030"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-12-19-Speech-4-0312
lpv:speaker	lp:Helmuth Markov2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-21--2004-07-19)3 treasurer; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 unknown; Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, far too late though it is, I of course welcome the Commission's statement of its intention to submit a Green Paper on services of general interest in the first quarter of 2003. It does, however, strike me as incomprehensible that the final conclusions and specific initiatives associated with it are to appear as long as six months later. Analyses and the demands for action resulting from them belong together. Having been called upon to do so by the Barcelona Council in March 2002, the Commission, in June of that year, adopted a new methodology for evaluating the quality of public services. You will be well aware that opinions on this are sharply divided, and I am telling you now that, in terms of its quality, this new evaluation methodology is an unmitigated disaster. In view of the invariable tendency of the debate on public services to bring forth ritual repetitions about deregulation and privatisation, it would at least be proper to conduct, in parallel with the Green Paper, a scientifically sound analysis of the situation in those markets and enterprises that have already been deregulated and privatised. There are marked distinctions to be drawn between the successes and failures in the various lines of business involved. The questions that demand answers are, firstly, whether equal rights of access are guaranteed to all citizens of the European Union, irrespective of where they live or of their levels of income. Secondly: has the cost of the service increased or fallen? Thirdly: has its quality improved or got worse? And fourthly: have the service's employees experienced an improvement or a deterioration in their social conditions? This also involves putting the service providers on an equal footing irrespective of their ownership structures. There is nothing fair about the competition if the regulations on aid put enterprises with a larger than 25 % public stake in them at a disadvantage over against their private-sector counterparts. So ‘yes’ to competition on the basis of the best services, and ‘no’ to competition on the basis of ownership!"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph