Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-17-Speech-4-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000217.5.4-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I welcome Commissioner Liikanen’s words, and I am contributing to the debate – we are all contributing to the debate – because, although the subject is broad in scope, it also concerns a specific fact.
The subject in question is of great political and social importance. Free enterprise, free movement and free competition are essential pillars of the political and economic structure of the European Union. Company restructuring is part of the principle of free determination of investments, and must therefore be defended. However, all too often we witness events which are in stark contrast with these principles. Today, we are witnessing one of these cases, which, on the surface, may seem to be of minor importance and affect only the specific industry, but which, if it is allowed to pass without an authoritative intervention by the European Union, will become an unwritten rule which will cause problems for many of the Member States and the Union as a whole.
An American company – Goodyear – with production sites in Italy, Germany and England, is reviewing its production and relocation, justifiably, in its own view. However, it seems to be doing it without observing the relevant Community legislation, for it is certainly not giving reasonable notice to employees or heeding the obligation to render an account of their use of Italian and European public finances. In Italy, Commissioner Liikanen, Goodyear is not carrying out restructuring but closing a plant whose production covers 14% of the market and which Goodyear itself defined as, ‘having the most highly-skilled workforce of all its plants’, a plant which was opened with a total of EUR 85 million of European capital. No notice was given of the closure, and no intention was shown of discussing the fate of the plant or its workers, despite the fact that the public funds invested in that plant make it much more public than private. It would be a serious matter if every non-European company were to learn to use Europe as a bus where you do not have to pay for the ticket, you do not have to pay for cooperation, you benefit from using the facility and you leave without being accountable to anyone.
Europe has to guarantee every sort of freedom, including freedom to use one’s own money for the purposes of one’s own freedom and not to let others use it at will, others who make demands and then, when the break is made, refuse even to discuss the terms of the break, despite the fact that this is a break which has been declared unilaterally.
Just now, Commissioner Liikanen was talking of restructuring which must not be uninformed. Sadly, in this case, he has not taken into account those who are affected and seems not to have considered those carrying out the restructuring. I would also like to point out to Commissioner Liikanen that it is not easy to take a matter to a national court. Of course, it is always possible, but when jobs have been lost and factories closed down, the idea of going to Court when proceedings are as lengthy as they are in Italy is not very reassuring.
Commissioner Liikanen, we expect an authoritative intervention. As Parliament, we are, of course, expecting to be able to contribute to the resolution you mentioned – we are ready and waiting – but we expect an authoritative intervention on this, which can on no account be allowed to reach its conclusion and be forgotten, as has almost happened already."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples