Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-03-08-Speech-2-602-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20160308.27.2-602-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, let me begin by making very clear the position of the Socialist Group throughout these negotiations. We are, of course, in favour of an improved and better system for legislators to know the impact of what they are doing and the potential costs that they may place on others. That is essential. But, we have always said that this must be a comprehensive assessment. It is not just about cutting costs to small and medium-sized enterprises, important as that is. It is also about the costs and burdens of other kinds. Not just of legislating, but potentially of the cost of not legislating, costs on the consumer, costs on public health and therefore on public budgets, costs to the environment, costs to the way our competition policies work. All this must be taken into account. Impact assessment must be comprehensive; a real cost-benefit analysis, in other words.
We must also bear in mind that we are talking about legislating at the European level. Now, when we get it right, when we bring in common rules for our common market we are replacing 28 divergent and contradictory sets of national rules. In other words we are simplifying things for businesses, we are cutting red tape. That must be part of the occasion.
And our third concern was that the procedure for impact assessments must, of course, be advisory. There is no right of veto for an appointed official in a legislative procedure. As elected representatives we must have the final say. Imagine if, 30 years ago, since this is International Women’s Day, an impact assessment had said: ‘oh, equal pay for equal work, that will cost businesses, that will cost the exchequer, no we had better not do that.’ Of course, we would have overridden that advice and taken the political decision to legislate anyway.
Since the agreement meets our concerns in these respects my Group will fully support it. We also support the other things in it – on programming, transparency, impact assessments – very good. We look forward to approving it and to working for the further implementation of this important agreement."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples