Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-15-Speech-3-037"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060315.3.3-037"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, more than at any time in the Union’s history there is a disjunction between those who seek to move forward and those who wish to turn back; between those who defend the single market and the Lisbon Agenda as the best means to guarantee long-term efficiency, competitiveness and growth, and those who reject free trade in favour of economic patriotism akin – as Giulio Tremonti said – to that immediately before the 1914-18 war.
The irony is that this so-called patriotism – thinly disguised economic nationalism – will bring as few benefits to the citizens of France, Spain or Poland as it does to the rest of Europe, for it is fair competition that drives the global market, raises quality and lowers prices, and it is fair competition that protectionism undermines. If any company can see commercial logic in merging with another, what business is it of ours to put roadblocks in its path? The great success of the euro, as the President of the Commission has pointed out, is that mergers and takeovers are proceeding apace. European industry is gearing up for the challenges of competing in a global economy.
These are issues for the Spring Council. They are issues for the Commission because the Commission is going to be tested in this climate as a defender and guarantor of the Treaties. Faced with an unprecedented assault on the internal market, the Commission must hold firm to the Treaties, hold firm to the basic freedoms and speak out when necessary – as you have, President Barroso, and as Commissioners McCreevy and Kroes have too – and act to defend the Union. But defence of the single market falls not only to the Commission; the Council has a role, as we stress in the motion we debate today. That means the Spring Council expediting transposition and implementation of the Union’s directives to deliver a single market with free movement of goods, services and capital. We want to see the European Council deal seriously with free movement of services, free movement of workers and free movement of capital. As they discuss the future financing of our Union, let the Heads of State and Government find the funds necessary for the training of our workforce, for the trans-European networks and for research and development through the European Institute for Technology, which will secure future economic dynamism.
It is time for our Heads of State and Government to formalise the Council meetings that take place in March and October. These need not be billed purely as economic policy summits; the demands of energy security, of peace in the Middle-East and of fighting internationally organised crime are equally urgent and should be on next week’s agenda. There should be public discussion too of the Union’s burgeoning defence policy, currently being planned behind closed doors. The Austrian Presidency opened to public scrutiny a recent Environment Council meeting; why not make this openness universal practice in the Council?
My group welcomes the Commission’s proposal to bring forward a concept paper so that we can discuss defence policy here in Parliament and involve our citizens in the discussion of what our continent can become.
President-in-Office, a century ago your country had a foreign minister who studied in Strasbourg, restored the old regime and dominated continental politics for 30 years. If Mrs Plassnik can emulate Metternich’s achievements, Europe will prosper. If she fails, she can always follow his example and flee to Britain."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples