Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-14-Speech-2-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060214.26.2-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I, for my part, should like to join others in thanking Mrs Gebhardt and Mrs Van Lancker not only for their excellent work, but also for the fairness and the spirit of cooperation they demonstrated with my, and other, groups. That being said, having heard Mr Harbour speak after Mrs Gebhardt and Mrs Van Lancker, I am not really sure that the famous joint text means the same for everyone, which worries me and reinforces my belief in the idea expressed by Mrs Rühle that the text is perhaps a compromise that increases, rather than reduces, legal uncertainty.
Mr McCreevy, Mr Barroso spoke about a misunderstanding. It is clear that the misunderstanding mainly stems from this notorious country of origin principle. We all want job creation, but jobs are not created merely by increasing competition and lowering prices with a view to increasing demand. Demand rises when people – citizens and workers alike - have confidence. If they are to have confidence, they must be convinced of the fair nature of the rules of competition. That is why the country of origin principle not only does not legally exist in the Treaties, but would also be, in my opinion, economically disastrous. We do not want a Union of 25 in which a ‘national rule versus national rule’ competition would take place. If we want to send positive political signals to the citizens of the new Member States, then let us provide ourselves with a budget that is equal to the solidarity we need to show; let us follow the Commission’s advice – and, in saying that, I address the Presidency of the Council – and see to it that all the Member States remove the restrictions on the free movement of workers; and let us see to it that 1 May 2006 is actually a 1 May for all the workers of the 25 countries of this European Union.
Finally, Mr McCreevy, during the last parliamentary term, the majority of MEPs speaking in plenary twice called on the Commission to draft a proposal for a framework directive on services of general interest - otherwise known as public services - in order to prevent these services from being contingent on the case law of the Court or the subject of derogations with regard to competition law. What is stopping you from issuing this proposal? Here is an election commitment we had made: to deal simultaneously with a framework directive on services of general interest and a directive on the internal market in services. By not issuing the proposal, you, your attitude and your Commission create an imbalance and give rise to, or increase, the mistrust felt by a small proportion of Europeans. From this perspective, you do not encourage the creation of a Union of 25 in which the dominant themes are solidarity between the East and the West and fair treatment for all workers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples