Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-19-Speech-4-037"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021219.2.4-037"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I hope that the Commissioner will not hold it against me for saying this – it is not intended personally – but what you gave us today as a statement from the Commission was vacuous, every bit as vacuous as the documents you have sent to us – and I emphasise ‘us’, as I am referring to Parliament – over the past few weeks. I will shortly be saying something about the existence of other documents that are worth talking about and discussing, but first I will turn to the documents and the statement that you have given us.
You started by mentioning in your introduction that we are engaged in a discussion, and one that is being conducted in a very open way. At any rate, that is how it came across when interpreted into German. What do you mean by 'open'? Open as regards the possible outcome or open in the way the discussion is conducted? Both interpretations make me uneasy. With an open outcome? We have already moved on too far for that. Now you issue a Green Paper, which I see as nothing more than a means of creating a smokescreen while there are other decisions that urgently need to be taken. This is yet another exercise in avoiding doing anything, whilst, at the same time, very practical preparations are going ahead in other areas. Nor is the discussion being conducted in an open manner, for, as I have just told you, we have been given your statement on behalf of the Commission, along with documents of four or five pages each, not that the number of pages is of great importance. Yet, while we are given these documents, others are getting what are described as ‘non-papers’ – substantial documents that are really worth discussing, and in which we could find that there is legal certainty on specific points. Take the so-called non-paper dated 12 November, with its margin numbers – all 102 of them! You discuss these things with others, but not with us. I just want to pick up one point and be told what the Commission really thinks about it. Item 100 says: ‘An enterprise may provide more than one service to the public, some of them realising a profit and others showing a loss. Even if the enterprise does not provide public services, its services may cross-subsidise each other’. What that means is that, if we get an answer, we would be resolving an important financial issue, one that would help bring legal certainty. What we need right now is an answer and not this or that Green Paper, which serve only to delay the discussion process for ever and a day."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples