Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-044"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001213.1.3-044"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I congratulate Mr Ferber on his report although we have some concerns that it does not go far enough. We believe in the need for liberalisation, competition and value for money. It is iniquitous that the Royal Mail in Britain is using taxpayers' money to intervene in continental liberalised markets whilst at the same time fighting to prevent that liberalisation in the United Kingdom. That is why I have re-tabled some of the amendments which we discussed in committee and which we will be voting for – especially in relation to the liberalisation of direct mail. That is essential for the development of the direct marketing industry.
We have concerns, also, about the increase back to 150 grammes from the 50 grammes that we believe is necessary. We have, alongside this, an absolute commitment to the universal service obligation. If it can be done in rural Sweden then it can be done in rural Britain without any great difficulties. I do not take any lessons from the Labour Party about the rural areas. When I was the Minister for the Environment in Britain I was responsible for producing a rural White Paper, which dealt with some of the problems relating to rural post offices, so I do not take messages from the Labour Party, however nicely spoken by Mr Simpson.
I am also glad to see that our continental Liberal friends are giving the lead to British Liberals. British Conservatives support Commissioner Bolkestein and we intend to consider, in the course of this debate – and subsequently as the debate proceeds and as the amendments are considered – whether we will vote against the further compromise, however much I respect and regard Mr Ferber's report as a compromise in the face of many difficulties. But, because we believe that Commissioner Bolkestein's original operation is much the best, we may well decide to vote against the further compromise in order to maintain those original proposals. It remains yet to be seen. We should consider it at the end of the debate."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples