Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-14-Speech-3-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071114.2.3-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, in negotiating the motion for a resolution on the challenge of globalisation, I saw very clearly the extent of the divide between left and right in this House. My PPE and ALDE colleagues have sought to criticise the millions of ordinary people who – as they watch jobs disappear due to corporate relocation, mergers and takeovers, or compare their tiny incomes to the lavish bonuses heaped on senior executives (who, by the way, preach the virtues of wage restraint) – doubt the benefits of globalisation.
In my view, globalisation is a necessary process, particularly as it gives the poorest countries access to international markets, thus enabling them to raise their people’s living standards. But let us not be deceived by sound bites! The perfect market, much beloved of liberals, is an illusion. Competition is necessary but it is never free.
Take the energy market, for example, where 90% of the world’s resources are controlled by sovereign states. A cartel dominates the oil market. Another cartel is gearing up to grab the gas market. Pricing policies are not transparent and they apply to no more than 40% of world trade. A third of the end price goes to a long chain of intermediary speculators whose economic contribution is nil. When these speculators and their ‘special vehicles’ end up in the ditch, central banks pump billions into the financial system to stave off widespread instability, but the effect is actually to underwrite speculation.
A few CEOs may manage a soft landing thanks to their golden parachutes but millions of consumers end up mired in debt and forced to sell off their homes. In the space of six months, nearly half a million Americans have had to file for personal bankruptcy. The European economy, meanwhile, is marking time. The Commission may have trimmed its economic forecasts but, in place of policy proposals, it is content to churn out familiar mantras. Yes, indeed, we need more growth and more job creation, driven by better coordination and more research and development and, yes indeed, we need to face new social realities.
But where are the budgets for these things? Where are the resources? Mr Barroso does not want to improve the integrated guidelines. The right wing refuses to discuss economic coordination. Mr Sarkozy emits quantities of high-sounding hot air but not once in half-an-hour does he use the word ‘social’. Yet all the opinion polls confirm that people want to see greater emphasis placed on social issues: they want to feel more secure, they want their purchasing power to improve and they want better public services.
The mayors of ten European capital cities have just signed a declaration in defence of public services accessible to all. But what is the Commission doing? It is hiding behind a shabby little protocol to the future treaty, guaranteeing subsidiarity only in respect of non-economic services – all the better to demolish the public services that ordinary Europeans are calling for! My group will not accept this Commission cop-out. We intend to join with the mayors, the Committee of the Regions, the Economic and Social Committee and the trade unions in a political struggle for a Europe with a stronger social dimension, in which public services have priority."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples