Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-14-Speech-4-051"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-12-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001214.1.4-051"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-12-14-Speech-4-0522
lpv:speaker	lp:Alain Esclopé2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, South-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Chasse, Pêche, Nature, Traditions (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"How will the postal sector emerge from this period in which contradictions and controversies have been used to prop up the arguments, which are nevertheless often technical, that have been put together in the context of opening it up to competition? Can we erase, with a simple decision, with a potentially small majority, the entire concept of the postal service, a concept whose roots and forms are bound up with the specific nature of each Member State? How can we not take into account the national differences covered by this quite unique sector, particularly from the point of view of adapting public service to the reality of local situations? How can we talk about public service in countries where this concept is barely acknowledged, if at all, whereas in others, it is grounded in the culture and represents a defining element of social cohesion, particularly in rural areas? We are not asking Sweden to change its system, but we certainly do not want it to impose its system on us. Admittedly, Mr Ferber’s text, after much haggling at committee stage, does little more than moderate and delay the Commission’s proposal. This proposal is unacceptable because it is based on assertions that have little or no justification. But how can we not see this compromise report as a compromise on the postal service itself? It is easy for the supporters of qualified liberalism to be satisfied with a text that waters down Commissioner Bolkestein’s ultraliberal proposal, which is founded entirely on ideological reasoning."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(The explanation of vote was cut short pursuant to Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph