Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-03-13-Speech-2-107-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Globalisation Adjustment Fund crisis derogation (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120313.7.2-107-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-03-13-Speech-2-108-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Marije Cornelissen2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; GroenLinks (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; FEMM (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; G/EFA (2012-02-01--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2011-03-23--2013-06-30)3 member; EMPL (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the Netherlands – EUR 30 million, Sweden – EUR 14 million, Denmark – EUR 50 million, Germany – EUR 37 million. Those are the amounts that these countries have received from the Globalisation Adjustment Fund in recent years. How ironic then that these very countries, countries where the situation is relatively good, are now limiting access to the Globalisation Adjustment Fund. When the first signs of crisis appeared, the Globalisation Adjustment Fund was extended to large businesses and industry sectors which were going bankrupt because of the crisis, with the threat of thousands of redundancies as a result. If only it were true that that extension was no longer needed, that the crisis was already behind us, and that crisis-triggered bankruptcies no longer caused mass redundancies. The opposite is true, however. In these times of cuts, the crisis is becoming increasingly tangible in all countries. The crisis is being used as reason for mass redundancies. I find it cruel and morally unacceptable that countries like the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden are blocking the crisis derogation. In fact, I find it incomprehensible. These countries are against the derogation because they are opposed to the fund in general. The EGF should not exist in the first place, the reasoning seems to go, so we can, therefore, give ourselves to oppose absolutely everything to do with it, while, in the meantime, obviously making good use of it ourselves, since the Netherlands, as Ms Harkin said, raked in another EUR 8 million at the very end of 2011. The adult reasoning on this matter should, of course, be that, while this fund continues to exist, it should be used as effectively as possible. The crisis is being used as a very handy excuse."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"carte blanche"1 "the"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph