Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-18-Speech-3-063"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060118.2.3-063"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, Mr Schüssel, allow me to adopt something of Mr Poignant’s tone and add a few things of my own to this budgetary wish list. Unfortunately, the budget is too small. Your country, Austria, is a member of the ‘club of six’, the ‘one per cent club’, the ‘club of penny pinchers’ which wants more Europe with less money. Yet, as the Presidency, Mr Schüssel, you must allocate more money to the Neighbourhood Policy in the East and to this new challenge constituted by EU energy security. Otherwise, we are going to rebel against the overly greedy Councils, just like Mr Poignant said. The Austrian Presidency’s intention to work for growth and jobs, competitiveness and the Lisbon Agenda is most laudable. Such objectives can be achieved only through the completion of the internal market. The best service we can render to Lisbon, growth and jobs is to open labour and services markets. Austria has explicitly recognised in its White Paper that the Services Directive is essential for completing the internal market and reinforcing European competitiveness. Yet when it comes to taking concrete steps to achieve the declared objectives, the Presidency’s pronouncements are much less reassuring. Soon there will be an initial review of the transition period for introducing freedom of movement of workers. But Austria declared that it will use this opportunity to extend the transition period in the area of free movement of workers, and it takes the reductionist position on the free movement of services. Are Austria’s declarations as Presidency consistent with its intentions as a Member State? On the one hand, the Presidency’s declared objective is boldness in fighting for Europe’s competitiveness, on the other, Vienna strives to stifle Europe’s potential. Enlargement was supposed to bring the European Union great benefits, increasing its competitiveness in global trade, largely through the influx of highly qualified, mobile and relatively cheap labour. Now, certain Member States, including Austria, regardless of the positive examples of Great Britain, Ireland and Sweden, want to forgo those crucial benefits, introducing transition periods immediately after enlargement."@en1
lpv:spokenAs

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph