Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-25-Speech-2-020"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Latest statements by Mr McCreevy on the Vaxholm case2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051025.3.2-020"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-10-25-Speech-2-0212
lpv:speaker	lp:Cecilia Malmström2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; ALDE (2004-07-20--2006-10-05)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2006-10-05)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2006-10-05)3 substitute; DROI (2004-07-30--2006-10-05)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Belarus (2004-09-15--2006-10-05)3 member; SEDE (2004-07-21--2006-10-05)3 unknown; Folkpartiet liberalerna (2004-07-20--2006-10-05)3 substitute; IMCO (2004-07-22--2006-10-05)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-20--2006-10-05)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the work on improving and clarifying the incredibly important Services Directive is now well under way in Parliament and the Council of Ministers. It is therefore odd and quite tragic that, in country after country, the directive is now being used as a weapon in what is basically a debate characterised by protectionism and nationalism. Instead of standing up for the proposal and constructively trying to improve it, ministers in, for example, Sweden have shamelessly exploited people’s anxiety about globalisation and jobs by portraying the Services Directive as a great threat. The words ‘social dumping’ are hissed like an evil incantation, denoting one more wicked stratagem from Brussels. No one wants to see social dumping, but the Services Directive does not lead to social dumping. Nor does it threaten the Swedish model or the Swedish collective agreements. The all but hysterical tone adopted by Social Democratic unions and politicians in Sweden is irresponsible. The Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr Östros, has completely lost the plot when he accuses the Commission of intervening against a Member State on behalf of a ‘foreign company’. It cannot have escaped Mr Östros that the foreign company is Latvian, that Latvia is a member of the European Union and that freedom of movement is one of the cornerstones of EU cooperation. How is it that there are no problems when Swedish construction workers travel to Germany and work for higher wages than in Sweden but for lower wages than those earned by German construction workers? That being said, there is an election campaign in Sweden, so that is the way things are. Free trade, competition and mobility of services are good for Europe and good for Sweden. Sweden is one of those countries that has most to gain from obstacles to the knowledge-intensive services being removed. To oppose the Services Directive for reasons to do with election tactics and to threaten to block it in the Council is an historic act of folly."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph