Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-15-Speech-3-159"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060315.17.3-159"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
This afternoon, I will be in the town of Le Syndicat in the department of Vosges. An event is taking place there that symbolises the consequences of the policies laid down in Brussels.
The SEB group is going to close a production unit in the town, since competition from low-price Chinese imports has become intolerable. More than 400 employees are out of a job, and that is without mentioning the subcontractors who are losing one of their main customers and who will also have to lay people off. This is a labour market area that is devastated by unemployment. Nevertheless, the SEB group is doing well. Its profits are growing. It is setting up overseas and buying up brands and so on, but it is closing down factories in France. That is because, caught between bureaucratic and financial constraints – stemming directly or indirectly from Europe - and the unfettered global competition negotiated by the EU, it has no other option. It is not SEB that has established the rules of the game; it is Brussels.
In an attempt to curb the logical outcome of European competition policies (restructuring, relocation and so on), the Cottigny report now proposes a list of bureaucratic measures that will not solve the problem, but rather will accentuate it and cause it to develop more quickly. The entire rationale must be changed, starting with the cult of ‘free’ competition coupled with the proliferation of regulatory and fiscal constraints. The job market would gain from this being done."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples