Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-26-Speech-4-058"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001026.2.4-058"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-26-Speech-4-0592
lpv:speaker	lp:Astrid Lulling2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South America and MERCOSUR (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-09-16--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Parti chrétien social (1999-09-16--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3 member; ECON (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". It is with the purpose of effectively muzzling the national parliaments, above all, that the European Commission, in its frenzy of regulation and liberalisation, has tabled a proposal for a directly binding regulation rather than a directive, which is to be whipped through Parliament and the Council of Ministers with all hands on deck so that it can enter into force as early as 31 December of this year. I have never seen such a show of strength. The urgency is all the more suspicious because the proposed unbundling of the local loop in the telephone network will lead to the impossible situation of the incumbent operators financing their own competitors, particularly in countries like Luxembourg, where the telephone line rental is kept low for social reasons. 480 francs per month do not cover the costs. It is to be assumed that the incumbent operators will have to let their competitors connect to the lines for even lower prices which do not cover the costs. In the short term they will probably tempt customers with free calls, which will of course lead to completely ruinous competition, which, at the end of the day, the small end-customers will have to pay for. What is being proposed here is the thorough dispossession of the former operator, which will lose a huge amount of money – around a billion francs in my small country – which of course will not be available to modernise the fixed network, quite apart from the fact that obviously no operator will be so stupid as to invest in the modernisation of a network with which it has to subsidise its competitors. And then there is the added problem of providing protection against tapping. If 20 or more competitors are allowed to hang around in the roughly 50 exchanges belonging to the former incumbent in my small country, then we can bid farewell to confidential telephone calls and security in these exchanges. I, too, am in favour of liberalisation in the interests of consumers. But if liberalisation permits excesses of the kind which I have just described – which ought in fact to be of interest to Mr Monti, the Competition Commissioner – then I will not go along with it any longer and that is why I voted against this report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph