Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-14-Speech-2-195"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-02-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Services (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060214.26.2-195"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-02-14-Speech-2-1962
lpv:speaker	lp:Pervenche Berès2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 chair; ECON (2004-09-01--2007-01-14)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2004-09-01--2007-01-15)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; AFCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Committee of Inquiry into the crisis of the Equitable Life Assurance Society (2006-01-19--2007-06-19)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, I owe the privilege of speaking in this debate to the unfortunate outcome of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs' examination of Mrs Wagenknecht's report. In the end, she removed her name from the report following the committee's vote. In the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, our draftsman, Mrs Wagenknecht, wanted to propose to reject this directive on the basis that Article 16 laid down the country of origin principle, which is incompatible with the subsidiarity principle, endangers services of general interest and risks leading to fiscal, social and environmental dumping, thus endangering the very foundations of the European social model. Our rapporteur also proposed to oppose the country of origin principle and the so-called 'Bolkestein' directive, which we should now call the 'McCreevy' directive, on the basis that it placed 25 legal systems in competition with each other, created legal uncertainty and risked resulting in unfair competition between businesses that would no longer be subject to the same conditions. Unfortunately, in its vote, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs did not follow her recommendations. Particularly with regard to the country of origin principle, our committee thought that it should be the rule, even though it will probably be challenged in plenary. However, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs did feel that a number of services should be excluded insofar as they are subject to specific regulations in other Community instruments. This particularly related to financial services. Fortunately, the risk of inconsistency in such a basis for exclusion was removed by the vote in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. I hope that it will be the same in plenary. The fact remains that, in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, we also ruled out the liberalisation of services of general economic interest and the privatisation of public service provision bodies and defended the idea that this directive must not attack the Community rules governing competition and state aid."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph