Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-30-Speech-1-089"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030630.10.1-089"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I wish to concentrate on that part of the report concerning public procurement where, unfortunately, the untoward situation has arisen in which, even though we issued a sound report at first reading, the quality has, since then, gone seriously downhill, with regard too to the common position we have obtained from the Council.
I think it is a huge problem when the Council adopts a common position that is not in accordance with current law as laid down by the Court of Justice. The fact that the Court lays down something of which the Council takes no account is a major problem, and matters are not made any better by our also having a committee that chooses not to take account of the Court pronouncements we have. I believe that we in the EU have a clear obligation to promote our own objectives concerning sustainable development and to comply with our social responsibility. That means that we must also be able to incorporate social and environmental considerations into public procurement.
I should like to say to some of those on the right wing who, in Parliament today, have accused us of being rabid environmental campaigners, that what is important in this case is that we in actual fact want to make public procurement transparent and to make it possible for social and environmental provisions to be incorporated into such procurement without, of course, disturbing the internal market. No one is talking about disturbing the internal market. We are all of us concerned that the internal market should operate properly, but we just want to make it possible for those who invite tenders to attach importance to things other than just price, that is to say to a broadly-based labour market, social conditions and the environment. It is in actual fact very simple, and fortunately we have a decision on this matter.
The second thing I have to mention is that, during the first reading, we tabled a number of amendments to Article 27, in actual fact emphasising the aspect of labour market conditions. As Mr Hughes said, a curious change has, however, again crept into the amendment whereby it has been made conditional upon the aforementioned agreements being made law in the Member States. It is therefore essential to have that clause removed before we vote on the recommendation for second reading on Wednesday. There is no reason for interfering with the collective agreements we have in certain countries, and that is what in actual fact would be happening if the small clause in question were not removed. I recommend to the House here today that it consider adopting Amendment No 40 but that it avoid also accepting this clause. I hope we can in that way support the split vote proposed by Mr Hughes."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples