Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-03-Speech-3-161"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080903.20.3-161"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The June List considers that working hours should be regulated at national level. This report should therefore not be dealt with in the European Parliament, even if it formally addresses the Commission’s treatment of a case of infringement.
The principle of subsidiarity, which is praised on every conceivable ceremonial occasion, is fundamental here. When the majority of the European Parliament gets into the details, it is exactly the opposite; nothing can in fact be left to the Member States. The Working Time Directive is in itself a clear infringement of the principle of subsidiarity. Countries have different business structures. Some have heavy processing industries, others have light industry, others again have a great deal of tourism and seasonal industries, and the public sector is structured in different ways. It is therefore entirely inappropriate to attempt to regulate the working hours of the whole of the EU, nor is there any reason to do so. Those who argue in favour of this say that we will otherwise have problems with social dumping in the EU. This is an extremely severe accusation against the countries which we have accepted as members of the EU, which all fulfil the Copenhagen criteria and which are all states governed by law with a free right to unionise.
This report is yet another attempt by the EU to interfere in the working hours issue which is the responsibility of the Member States. We have voted no, with reference to the principle of subsidiarity."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples