Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-26-Speech-2-017"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060926.3.2-017"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Madam President, one can understand the desire to define the scope of EU interference in the provision of public services. It helps if you are running a business or a public service to know what the rules are, but I am appalled that this should hinge on defining the distinction between services of economic general interest and services of non-economic general interest. Surely, all services are economic in the proper sense that they have an economic value, otherwise they presumably would not be provided. I fear that attempts at such a definition will merely cause more confusion, less efficiency and more scope for ambiguous judgments from the European Court of Justice.
At root, the problem is that national and local authorities must have sovereignty over the management of public services, because public services are paid for by national governments on behalf of their electors. Yet here we are trying to make public services obey a common set of EU rules. Has anyone spotted the inherent contradiction? Mr Barroso has outlined an ambitious programme of work for the Commission. I say to him: please just leave it alone. Please let national governments do their own thing."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples