Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-06-Speech-3-105"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-02-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020206.5.3-105"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-02-06-Speech-3-1062
lpv:speaker	lp:Ilda Figueiredo2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Partido Comunista Português (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AGRI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2002-03-05)3 substitute; PECH (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". This report on State aid closely follows the line of the previous report, endorsing the observation that there was a reduction in State aid during the period between 1997 and 1999, specifically due to reduction in aid in Germany and Italy, the two countries that provide the highest levels of State aid. The rationale of the report is based on defending the reduction of State aid and on stepping up the measures used in this context, specifically tax measures. The objective, in accordance with the conclusions of the Stockholm Summit, is to achieve a steady reduction in State aid by 2003, only allowing aid, in exceptional circumstances, specially requested by the Member States. Existing Community aid will, of course, continue. Nevertheless, with the creation of the State aid assessment panel, pressure on Member States to reduce aid will increase, with States basing their approach on protecting competition, ignoring the problems suffered by weaker economies and pilfering America’s own policy, which continues to grant State aid in various economic sectors, in defiance of WTO rules. This is why we have voted against the report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph