Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-15-Speech-4-110"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-05-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Postal services2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030515.5.4-110"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-05-15-Speech-4-1112
lpv:speaker	lp:Gilles Savary2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-21--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
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, first of all I should like to welcome the Commissioner, while at the same time, without wishing to give offence to her, regretting the fact that Mr Monti or Mr Bolkestein is not facing me across the Chamber, because they are of course the ones most directly concerned with this question. We have discovered, in effect, that in the Commission’s work programme for 2003, it was intending to submit a directive on postal services which would seek to separate legally, in other words to turn into subsidiaries, the commercial activities on the one hand and the public-service activities on the other, without consulting Parliament or the Council, in other words by using the procedure laid down in Article 86(3) of the Treaties. This method of procedure therefore amounts to breaking away from what has always been the legal basis for discussions about postal services within the Union, in other words Article 95, which is essentially a codecision procedure and therefore makes any decision on the matter the subject of a democratic debate. If this assumption were to prove to be true, it would of course be a recourse to force which we would be unable to accept. We have examined several postal directives which all form part of the gradual process of opening up the market, and we do not see any reason for resorting to force in this way, which I repeat would be intolerable. I should like to ask you, Commissioner, whether the Commission intends to confirm this assumption, in other words to change the legal basis so as to avoid any democratic debate before the Member States and before the representatives of the people. Secondly, I should like to know what the content of this draft is, since you have given us, very precisely, during this debate, the opportunity to do so. In fact, since we know that the area concerned will gradually disappear between now and 2009, we do not see how it could be the subject of subsidiary creation or legal separation. Finally, we should like to know the motivation behind this draft text which at the moment seems to us to be extremely confused."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph