Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-26-Speech-3-148"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051026.17.3-148"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the President of the Council mentioned in his speech that discussions at Hampton Court tomorrow will touch on the combating of terrorism, and so I want to start by saying something about 7 July.
That, too, is what those who elected you expect. While Mr Poettering has had something to say about a lot of things, he has not had much to say about the summit that awaits you tomorrow. With that summit in mind, Mr President of the Council, I have something to ask of you: it is that you should ensure that the summit focuses on what the Commission has given us as its theme, on the fact that the fundamental precondition for a successful economy in Europe is not the destruction of social cohesion, but rather the truth that the profits that businesses make are a good thing because that is what businesses are there for, but that those, namely the workers, whose labour earns the profits, must benefit from them and keep decent jobs with decent incomes, from which they can feed their families. If that is the goal of the European Union, Mr President of the Council, then we Social Democrats stand side by side with Labour.
The 7 July attacks in London were attacks on European civil society. They were attacks on the British people, but they were more than that; they were attacks on all of us. That is why your response – not only as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, but also as the President of the Council – was a response on behalf of us all. The Labour government’s response, with an appropriate combination of rigour in public security and dialogue with the people, was the right one. It was one of the successes of the British Presidency of the Council, and one for which I want to thank you.
When, though, tomorrow, you discuss the European social model, you and the Heads of State or Government will be discussing a social model that has been developed progressively in Europe over a period of 50 years since the end of the Second World War. At the heart of this development was the consistent coupling together, for the first time in economic history, of economic and technical advances with social progress. All economic and social growth went hand in hand with more social rights and greater social stability. That is the formula that has made the European social model such a success.
Now there are more and more so-called economists, even at governmental level, who have been telling us for years that further economic and social progress is conditional upon the destruction of social cohesion, with lower wages, longer working hours, and fewer rights for workers and trade unions. To that we say ‘no’, for it destroys the European social model. That is the path that Commissioner McCreevy has mapped out, and we ask you, tomorrow, to close it off.
You are right to say, Mr President, that the European internal market and its development present us with a great opportunity. Yes, of course, we want the free movement of services, but what we do not want is the free movement of social dumping in Europe. If the country of origin principle is to be used as a means of wrecking social standards, then that is not the services directive that we want to see.
The market produces many things, but solidarity is not one of them; that we have to create for ourselves, and it is above all a task for the states. We, here in the European Parliament, must help them to do that."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples