Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-15-Speech-4-020"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-01-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Recognition of professional qualifications2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040115.1.4-020"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-01-15-Speech-4-0212
lpv:speaker	lp:Ioannis Koukiadis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (2002-02-05--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-21--2004-07-19)3 member; PETI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; 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 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we need to bear two guidelines in mind when deciding whether or not to accept the proposed amendments. The first is that it will be much easier for the liberal professions to move around than it has been to date, especially for those who exercise regulated professions. The aim here is to develop the internal market and the service sector, which is lagging behind. The second guideline we need to lay down is quality assurance of the services provided during cross-border movements. Within this context, we need to examine the basic innovations of the proposed directive, such as distinguishing between the cross-border provision of services and cross-border establishment, the proposed levels and so on. As regards the cross-border provision of services in particular, I think that amendments which set terms and conditions in order to prevent infringements should be accepted. On the other hand, the innovation in the directive introducing the concept of common bases should be especially welcomed, because it gives the liberalised agencies the opportunity to take an active part in strengthening their cross-border cooperation. Now there is an opening in civil society; however, if we are to safeguard consumer interests on the basis of the second guideline which we referred to earlier, we have a reasonable interest in calling on the Community legislator not to turn mobility into a pretext for undermining the level of training of the professions on the move. That is why it is important, where diplomas certifying a theoretical education are granted to diploma holders who study in various countries, that we demand as a that their courses be held in every country by recognised education establishments and not by companies which do not fall within the official education system of the host country. We all need to agree on this if we do not want to put the product of education on the same footing as an uncontrolled industrial product. Consequently, it is one thing for us to encourage cooperation between universities – or even, if you like, between universities and other education establishments, on which no-one can disagree – and it is quite another thing, under cover of cooperation, for us to indirectly allow units not recognised as education agencies by legislation to be recognised as such. That is why the amendment proposed by Mr Hatzidakis is a dangerous amendment."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"sine qua non"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph