Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-098"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030312.2.3-098"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We have voted against Parliament’s resolution which gives the Commission a mandate to negotiate a liberalisation of the trade in services, within the so-called GATS round. This mandate has been agreed on a far too vague a basis, the Commission will exploit it widely as usual, and the people will be rendered a little more helpless by those same people who claim to make them ‘stronger’.
Our fears are all the greater when we see that the Convention presided over by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing intends to include trade policy amongst the exclusive competences of the Union, dealt with by means of a qualified majority, and to remove the exceptions (cultural and audiovisual services, education, social services and health services) which Article 133(6) of the EC Treaty stated should be dealt with by means of unanimity. We believe such a development would make GATS even more of a trap for us.
It is also noted with some amusement that the French Government has protested and has called for unanimity on these ‘very sensitive’ issues to be maintained. However, should these areas be considered more sensitive than others, than the production of water or nuclear engineering, for example? If unanimity really ensures such good protection, why is it demonised in all European affairs?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples