Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-03-Speech-1-074"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010903.6.1-074"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, my group and myself, a rapporteur many years ago, are in favour of the regulation, but not because we are particularly taken with it, since what is presented to us here as a European limited liability company is incomplete. There will not be one European limited liability company, but 15 European limited liability companies. What complete disorder! I do not want to go into the details. The Council has confirmed what is common knowledge: that the Council itself is the problem when it comes to European legislation. The Council, not the Commission and not Parliament: the Council is the problem! It still wants only to decide on matters unanimously, and if there is a legal base for doing so – in this case Article 308 – all the better. So we do not need Parliament. But we will – as Mr Lehne said – very carefully consider whether this legal base is adequate, and in emergencies we shall involve the European Court of Justice in the matter. In the hands of the Council, Community law is becoming a new style of international law, with the difference and the practical advantage that it does not have to be ratified either by the European Parliament or by national parliaments. This is the strategy of the Council.
Why should this European limited liability company be such an attractive prospect? Why should it be adopted? Is it not the case that this European limited liability company is threatened with the same fate as the previous company patent under the Luxembourg Convention? In this case, the Council, after many years of laborious work, also came to a compromise, and the whole of industry, all parties concerned, were not interested in it. Perhaps things will not be different with this form of European limited liability company. So what are the advantages? Why should we create a European limited liability company? What are the fiscal advantages, for example? I, for one, cannot see any.
Just one more remark: It may well be that the tenth Directive concerning cross-border mergers of limited liability companies will again be unearthed after this flop, by way of a supplement as it were, because nothing will come of this European limited liability company. But hold on a minute, my friends from the Commission and the Council, nothing came, first time around, of the tenth Directive concerning cross-border mergers of limited liability companies and involving the abolition of participation, and nothing will come of it this time!
Now that we have come to grips with the European limited liability company as it were, I would like to remind you that other company forms are next on the list: the European association, the European mutual society and the European cooperative. I hope that the Commission lays down proposals on these matters in the near future."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples