Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-019"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.2.2-019"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as a new Member I am pleased to be able to make my maiden speech here today, even though there has been a delay. I would like to begin by thanking the rapporteurs Mr von Wogau, Mr Langen, Mr Rapkay and Mr Jonckheer, as well as the Commission, for their excellent cooperation.
Competition is certainly fundamental to the social market economy and European competition policy is a success story; take the energy and telecommunications sectors, where there has been a demonstrable lowering of prices and improvement in quality of service. All this is to the good of the consumer. But we have now arrived at a point where we need to develop competition policy further. The Commission has put forward a new White Paper on this containing two key points: dropping the obligation to notify and retrodisplacement of law enforcement. Dropping the obligation to notify will mean less red tape and administration costs, at any rate. At the same time, this change of system will also lead to more onus being placed on the individual in the business world, of course. It will no longer simply be a case of submitting papers and having them approved; for one thing, each person will have to take responsibility themselves, and that is probably why there is unease about this in other quarters. However I believe that we should use this opportunity for Europe to set down a marker for less red tape.
The second point relates to the retrodisplacement of law enforcement. If we are to create a culture of law in Europe, then there is no doubt that the law must be applied not only by the Commission, by central bodies, but also by national authorities, by national courts. We are not discussing the fact that although every EU law is only ever decided on centrally, it is precisely the adaptation phase where we will experience a lack of legal certainty. It will certainly be necessary to develop an instrument for this in the anticipated legislative procedure that will enable enterprises to enjoy legal certainty and to have recourse to the Commission in this matter. The way to a European monopolies commission must be kept clear, something that will certainly form a subject for future discussion. But we need there to be more transparency in the competition policy. Parliament must have more involvement and I also believe that if we were to introduce a register in which we could ascertain what state aid is being granted, then this would encourage the Member States to be more disciplined.
However, when it comes to what the future holds for competition, there are two issues dear to my heart. One is subsidiarity. We all hold the view that competition is vital to the economy and requires there to be efficiency, and I believe we should also permit competition in the regions. Competition between the regions will certainly strengthen rather than weaken the European Union. I would cite, by way of example, the issue of job creation schemes, savings banks and regional banks, and Gütesiegel. Here, a region has, by its own efforts, created a means of marketing its own products. This own initiative must not be destroyed by European intervention.
I believe there is also a need to raise the de minimis regulation. We should do everything within our power to force the regions into a situation where they have to compete with each other. My second point relates to discussion about competition and the social market economy, although I am not going to talk about market failure just now. I have already referred to the regional and savings bank sector, but I would just like to focus on a matter one hears again and again in certain quarters. These days, someone who lives in an old people’s home is accommodated within the social field. However, I could also regard them as a customer, and I believe we should enter into rather clear and timely discussion on the ways in which the social field, that is evolved structures, stifle competition. Apart from that, I could refer to any customers, any sector, as customers, and thereby have a highly destructive effect on social fields.
To conclude, I would just like to say something on the principle of subsidiarity. I believe it to be of vital importance that where Member States allow regions and local authorities to raise taxes, they should continue to be able to do so and not be subject to across- the-board regulation by Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples