Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-12-Speech-3-297"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-02-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:2002 review of the Internal Market Strategy2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030212.10.3-297"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-02-12-Speech-3-2982
lpv:speaker	lp:Armonia Bordes2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees and Delegation for relations with Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Lutte ouvrière (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the report wants Parliament to give its support to the Commission’s Internal Market Strategy, which seeks to homogenise the various national markets. What concerns the rapporteur is the gap between the intention of completing the unification of the market at European level and the reluctance of the national States. However, what concerns the working classes of the European Union is certainly not that, but rather the avalanche of collective dismissals. The big companies who are responsible for those dismissals did not need any vote in the European Parliament to homogenise their attitude in this area. These collective dismissals have been carried out by big companies such as Airlib in France or big multinationals such as Daewoo, ACT, Arcelor, Pechiney or Fiat, which operate in several countries in Europe, and whose shareholders, both past and present, are well able to afford to preserve the jobs of all those people whom they are rendering unemployed. If big companies wish to restructure, that is their affair, but what is inadmissible and revolting is that they should do it by condemning their workers to unemployment and poverty. It is the shareholders who should pay, and not the workers. The profits of the companies and the capital of their shareholders should be used, as a matter of priority, to guarantee the jobs and wages of the workers."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph