Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-09-Speech-1-154"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090309.18.1-154"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I rise to challenge Mr Allister on what he said earlier in his ludicrous comments about the supposed costs of EU regulation to businesses, and in particular British businesses.
These are based on some so-called studies which are being hawked around the British Euro-sceptic press at the moment with ever more lurid calculations about these costs.
However, those studies are wrong on three counts. First, they exaggerate the amount of legislation that is adopted at EU level instead of national level, quoting 50% or more whereas most national studies show it to be between 6 and 15%. Secondly, they take no account of the fact that EU legislation, when we get it right, cuts costs to businesses and cuts red tape by having a single set of standards – common rules for the common market – instead of 27 divergent and separate ones. Thirdly, they take no account of the fact that when we do impose costs, it is often deliberate in order to save money downstream. When we require cigarettes to have a health warning system, or when we require asbestos to be phased out of our products and our workplaces, it is in order to cut health costs and save lives for people downstream.
These studies cynically make no attempt to balance up the whole picture, and it is a scandal that somebody who claims to represent all of his voters only looks at one side of the argument."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples