Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-03-10-Speech-4-010-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110310.3.4-010-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the Commissioner is telling us that the Memorandum of Understanding was drawn up under Article 122, part 2. I would like to ask the Commissioner what happens when one article of the Treaty is in direct contradiction with other articles in the Treaty; as Stephen Hughes has asked, how do we decide on the hierarchy? It is in contradiction with Article 153.
It is also in contradiction with Article 9, the social clause, which I have quoted many times in this Chamber when speaking about the Irish austerity package, where it says that in defining and implementing all its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment and the fight against social exclusion, etc. And what about Article 28 in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, under which workers have the rights to negotiate and conclude collective agreements and, in the cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action? Many Irish workers would see that they are in that position at the moment. How do we deal with the contradiction between the different articles in the Treaty?
Another question for you, Commissioner: are you stating that the Memorandum of Understanding was entirely the responsibility of the Irish Government and that the Commission acquiesced or agreed?
Finally, let us assume here you have the power to do all of this – and you are telling us you have; why then was there no effort to reduce or eliminate bank bonuses? Why was there no effort to ensure that those at the top of the salary scale paid their fair share? Why is it that one euro was deducted from the minimum wage? I agree entirely with what Stephen Hughes has said: this fuels anti-European sentiment. Citizens see what is happening. They see how the Commission is working in this whole process, and what they see is that it is those on the minimum wage, those who are in collective agreements, are being hit with these austerity plans.
Finally my main question, Commissioner, is: who decides? Is it the Court of Justice? Who decides when articles of the Treaty are in conflict or when the Commission acts in such a way as to bring those articles into conflict with one another?"@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples