Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-026"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-12-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Competition between postal services2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001213.1.3-026"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-12-13-Speech-3-0272
lpv:speaker	lp:Willi Piecyk2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; BUDG (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Latvia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, the Postal Services Directive of 1997 provided for a gradual and controlled opening of postal markets to private providers. The House certainly has no problems with that. At the same time, the directive provided for the preservation of a high-quality universal service, and that is the real crux of the matter. The point is that a universal service needs to be funded, and this has been said a few times already. The Commission stated at the time that it would present studies and data and figures on the implications of the funding requirement. We are still waiting for these. So there remains something of an unresolved question, namely what and how much it takes to establish and finance the sort of reserved domain that will guarantee us a good, solid universal service. It is therefore desirable that Parliament should not subscribe to the battering-ram strategy proposed by the Commission and should adhere to the strategy of controlled and gradual opening of the postal markets. And as for employment, my dear Markus, we see things differently. It goes without saying that the postal services are not a job-creation programme. But this Parliament and the European Union also have some responsibility for employment and for the social conditions in which the postal services operate. Whether the new providers create jobs and the number and quality of such jobs cannot be a matter of indifference to us, nor can the number and nature of the jobs that are to be preserved by the traditional providers of postal services. These things must also be our concern. Let me say this to Georg and Markus: when the postman calls once, or even twice, we are well aware that this is not the ultimate social service in Europe. But when grandma is happy because she has a friendly postman, which is also a factor in the quality of postal services, we should not begrudge her that pleasure but be happy with her. I should like to express my very sincere thanks to Markus Ferber, because he has shown himself very willing indeed to compromise so that we could put together a constructive proposal. This is it now – I think – and the Commission will take it from here with our wholehearted support. Provided it proposes a high-quality universal service as a dynamic blueprint for the future, the Commission will have our support, but not otherwise."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph