Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060117.5.2-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Greens in this House reject the port package, not least for reasons of good form, since it was presented in haste by Commissioner De Palacio at her last part-session, that is to say at a time when she ought really to have relinquished office long ago. It looks bad to reintroduce, almost unchanged, a directive that Parliament has already rejected and, so to speak, throw it down before your successor and the House.
Opposition to the port package comes from almost all the Member States; it has been rejected by the conservative government in Holland, the Labour government in Great Britain, and both the former red-green and the present conservative and social democrat coalition governments in Germany. There is a justifiable fear of an economic backlash brought on by the need for investments to pay off over shorter periods of time, by the expensive growth in bureaucracy and by the fact that competition is already in place. Costs in EU ports are very low; half of what they are in the USA and one-third of what they are in Asia. The dockers are justified in going on strike, for they fear wage dumping. There is no place in a social market economy for a social freeze policy of this kind.
Opposition to the port package comes from an immense coalition of conservatives, socialists and greens. Let me urge you to join with us in rejecting it and in giving Commissioner Barrot the opportunity to put before us a new regulation that will create the transparency that European ports need."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples