Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-11-15-Speech-2-434-754"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111115.27.2-434-754"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I voted against this report because I think that the rapporteur’s approach to State aid for services of general economic interest (SGEI) is inappropriate and contrary to the objective of a competitive internal market. At the moment, there is no single, clear definition of an SGEI and, given their diversity in Member States, it is probably very difficult, if not impossible, for us to have such a definition. I think that it is counterproductive in this area for us to harmonise rules just for the sake of harmonisation, as each Member State applies a definition according to its particular domestic situation.
Against this background, I feel that a horizontal directive on SGEI is inappropriate as we cannot draft a law without having a definition of the legislative object first. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) very clearly sets out how the competition rules are applied to these services, obviously with the proviso that the public service objective is not jeopardised. The aim of the rapporteur’s proposals is to remove SGEI from the competition rules, especially the one referring to the exemption from notification, without setting a ceiling for State aid for hospitals, social housing and so on, or the one for raising the ceiling for the
rule. There is no objective justification for these proposals and they jeopardise competition."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples