Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-09-Speech-3-050"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050309.5.3-050"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, since a great deal has, of course, already been said about the Lisbon strategy in this debate, I should like to confine myself to three points.
First of all, the Lisbon strategy must, after the euro, enlargement and the Constitution, become the EU’s next big success. We have no choice. That presumes, though, that we give the citizen the confidence and the leeway to develop new initiatives and meet new challenges. My neighbour in Rijswijk is perfectly capable of taking sound decisions about his future himself, and he does not need to be told what to do by the Dutch Government, let alone the European Union.
This brings me to my second point. We should be more critical about the role of the government in the framework of the Lisbon strategy. The question presents itself whether the government should be the problem solver or if it is perhaps the problem itself. Needless to say, the government must keep an eye on things and prescribe certain conditions, but far too often, we notice that the government obstructs, rather than stimulates, new initiatives. In my view, deregulation, a reduction in the administrative burden and cutting right down on red tape must therefore be central in the Lisbon strategy if we really want to achieve this desperately needed reinforcement of Europe’s competitiveness.
Thirdly, I do, of course, agree completely with the Members who believe that Europe should take pride in its unique model, but we should also realise that this social model can be enforced only when we generate more economic growth. All too often, my fellow MEPs on my left have preserved the myth that social policy and economic growth are mutually exclusive, whether the subject is the Lisbon strategy or the services directive. Time and again, they intimate a false contradiction between a free, innovative, dynamic knowledge economy and social policy. It is therefore beyond me why the Socialist Group in this House abstained during last week’s vote in the parliamentary coordination group, particularly in the light of the fact that the other groups had really done their level best to reach a widely acceptable compromise. I am therefore delighted that the spokespersons of that group now say that the text before us deserves broad support. It makes last week’s abstention of vote all the more mysterious, but let us simply put it down to progressive insight.
There is no policy that is more social than policy that creates more and better jobs and creates space for entrepreneurship. It remains to be seen whether there is really a majority to back this Commission policy. Should this be the case, then that would be a welcome development."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples