Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-174"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060404.21.2-174"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I should like to thank the Commissioner for the dynamism and promptness with which he submitted this speedily-drafted document. The Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe would go as far as to say that it represents an advance on the position which the European Parliament adopted, which is a good thing for employment in Europe. The ALDE Group takes the view that creating jobs is the best social structure there is, more so than protecting what we have achieved thus far. Unfortunately, there are a number of factors and sectors that remain excluded, which Member States could exploit in order to protect their own markets. That is what we call protectionism and is likely to result in many legal proceedings at the European Court of Justice.
There are still container concepts, such as gambling, the audiovisual sector, and the list goes on, and what they cover is left to the Member States to decide. We would have preferred to see a much tighter definition and delineation of what is excluded and what is not. Unfortunately, there is no support for this at the moment, and more time may well be required.
We hope that people will come to realise this. Sometimes, as is the case in France, this can cause problems if you want to reform in order to secure our current achievements and prosperity, not least for the sake of our children. Millions of people are still, every Tuesday, taking to the streets to protest. What a shame! Politicians are there to take long-term decisions and, occasionally, to be re-elected in the very short term. Sometimes, we opt for the latter.
In any case, we feel that a step has been taken in the right direction. We supported the proposal at first reading. We hope that some more light will be shed as to why a number of sectors are excluded. For example, as you mentioned yourself, the definitions should become less ambiguous so that it becomes more difficult for Member States to protect their incoming services from others. After all, mobility and dynamism in the economy will need to be improved and strengthened in the internal market if we are to be capable of competing with other large economic regions in the world. I think that that is how we can hold onto our prosperity. I thank you and hope that a positive outcome can be achieved very quickly during the forthcoming Council."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples