Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2013-10-23-Speech-3-034-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20131023.7.3-034-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I and my group welcome the emphasis that tomorrow’s Council will place on economic matters. The agenda says – and I quote – that the Council will have a ‘thematic discussion’. They are going to ‘take stock’ and ‘assess ongoing work’. That does not sound very inspiring to me. I fear that this agenda merely asks for business as usual, while outside, real businesses are still struggling.
We all know what needs to be done. The only question in my mind is whether we have the political will to actually deliver it. Perhaps, instead of thematic discussions, we need clear decisions. Instead of taking stock, let us actually have some action, and instead of assessing ongoing work, perhaps some radical reform to remove the barriers to competitiveness would be useful.
Europe should be exporting goods and services, not jobs and wealth, but every time we place an additional burden on businesses and industry, we make Europe less attractive to potential investment. In my own Member State, research by the think-tank Open Europe highlighted that, of the 100 most costly regulations for the UK economy, 24 of those laws actually cost more than the benefits that they bring. We need to look again at many of those laws.
The Commission’s proposals for REFIT (Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme) were a good opening salvo in the war on red tape, and I welcome them. With any red tape, of course, it is much easier to put in on than it is to get it off again. EU red tape is no different. But last week we were presented with a new way forward. This report on EU red tape was drafted by the leaders of some of Europe’s most successful businesses. I am sure they will be reviled by the left and by the Greens in this Chamber because they are not, of course, EU-funded NGOs. But, unlike those NGOs, these are the people who actually provide the jobs and the taxes that pay all of our salaries and for all of our services. We should be listening to them with care. In this report there are some very sensible suggestions. I think Mr Barroso already has a copy of it, and I hope that he will go and beat Commissioner Andor over the head with it, because it is his department that produces many of the regulations that we want to get rid of.
One of the absurdities in this debate is that many of the people in this room, who bask in the title of pro-European, have an agenda for centralisation that will actually damage Europe: an agenda that will limit its economy, limit the opportunities of its people and condemn us all to a poorer future. Because there is nothing pro-European about obsessively pursuing an outdated vision that is undermining Europe’s future potential. That is the old-fashioned agenda that is reinforced by many of the vested interests that we have within the Brussels beltway. Just think of all the NGOs that we face every day, which are paid by the Commission to campaign for yet more regulations and yet more red tape. We seek their opinions as stakeholders, but all too often we are simply receiving the opinions of individuals with a centralising agenda of their own.
It was almost exactly 150 years ago at Gettysburg that Lincoln outlined the challenge of a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Well, today in the EU, we have an EU of the NGOs, by the NGOs and for the NGOs. This challenge is why much of the good work done by the Commission’s Internal Market and Trade and Industry departments is undermined by the paid allies of the Commission’s own Social Affairs or Environment departments. It is all too often a case of one step forward and two steps back. Overcoming those vested interests should be our challenge, but it will be very difficult. However, I can tell you now where to start. We could slash the EUR 7.5 billion that the Commission gives to those very NGOs. A report here by the New Direction think tank outlines exactly that. I would recommend it to you as yet more set reading. It is a very good study. It sets out the reforms needed so that we can fully represent the people of Europe and not predominantly the interest groups of the European district.
I hope we will see some action from the European Council this week: action to break down barriers to starting and expanding a company, action to break down the barriers to Europe’s competitiveness, and action to ensure that our debates are not drowned out by the special interest groups with their own agendas. These reports show the way forward to reforming Europe’s economy. They should be set reading for anyone who genuinely wants to see a business-led recovery in Europe."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples