Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-055"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.2.2-055"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I shall now quickly turn, Mr President, to Mr Rapkay’s report, and I would like to thank him sincerely for the quality of his work and for the broad endorsement given to the Commission’s XXVIIIth Annual Report on Competition Policy. We share the same basic views but the Rapkay report lays emphasis on several points that we shall need to consider very carefully. I will mention only two, in order to be brief. The first is greater transparency. Parliament knows how important we all consider the question of transparency in competition policy, as I did right from the moment I had my hearing, on 1 September, in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. As regards the international aspect of competition policy, I can confirm, Mr Rapkay, that the Commission is willing to provide Parliament with a report on this subject, to which Mrs Randzio-Plath has also drawn our attention. We have very satisfactory bilateral relations with the relevant American, Canadian and Japanese authorities as regards competition policy, and we are working to ensure that competition is treated as a separate topic within the World Trade Organisation.
Mr Jonckheer, I would like to thank you just as warmly for your report on the seventh survey on State aid in the European Union. I will not talk about codecision here, but this certainly does not mean I do not consider it important. It has major institutional implications which obviously go beyond the specific area of competition; I am therefore not qualified to give an opinion, and this is obviously a matter for the broader context of the Intergovernmental Conference.
With regard to your suggestions, Mr Jonckheer, you already know that my staff, who, although short-handed as usual, are fortunately highly qualified, are working hard to produce the register of State aids and the State aids ‘scoreboard’. I am awaiting with great interest the results of the eighth survey, which, according to the scheduled timeframe, should be being drawn up by the staff now, in January, and for adoption by the Commission in March 2000, to see whether the latest trends are confirmed.
Mr Jonckheer, Mrs Thyssen and Mr Gemelli raised the issue of the state of preparation of the candidate countries in terms of competition in general and of State aid. I can only say very briefly, that we are actively working with them on a practical level: they are making preparations, they now all have competition laws and are setting up the relevant authorities.
I can also say, in respect of your concerns on energy and especially on the environment – which, as you know, I share – that we are concluding the review of the organisation of environmental State aid. In connection with the issue of State aid, I would also like to take up one of the points raised by Mrs Riis-Jørgensen, among others regarding repayment of
illegal aid. In April 1999, the Commission adopted new Rules of Procedure which introduced specific rules on repayment. In the near future – and I can assure you of this – you will see just how seriously we mean to take these rules.
Finally, Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Langen warmly for his report, which, although geared more towards a specific sector, is a valuable contribution. I would like to say that, as we know, the Commission report on State aid to the steel industry does not include individual decisions made under the exception procedure, pursuant to
Article 95 of the ECSC Treaty, but addresses decisions which are not covered by the code on aid for the steel sector. In respect of future provisions on aid for the steel sector, which will come into force in July 2002, we will ensure that strict discipline
continues to be applied, and the industry itself now agrees on the need for this. When we have finalised our proposal on the new rules and decided on the most suitable legal form, I will be happy to present our viewpoint to you.
So, Mr President, I will walk away from this debate, for which I am very grateful to Parliament, in the knowledge that we have the European Parliament’s intellectual and political support, which appears to come from all sides of the House, for competition policy, its basic appreciation for the work the Commission is carrying out and its confidence in our ability to continue to deliver in the future. I am especially grateful for all of this. We will continue the interinstitutional dialogue opened with the Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs, and, at a more general level, with Parliament. In this regard, I liked your term, Mrs Palacio Vallelersundi: we must all pull together, preferably in the same direction. Competition is not an end in itself, as Mr Rapkay rightly pointed out, but it plays an extremely important role in European integration. As Mr von Wogau said at the start of the debate, at the end of the day competition is not an abstract concept: it is in the public interest and forms the basis of the social market economy. I would also like to say that competition policy will play a valuable social, as well as economic, role in the European integration process, as it has done in the past."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples