Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-15-Speech-4-025"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-01-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Recognition of professional qualifications2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040115.1.4-025"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-01-15-Speech-4-0262
lpv:speaker	lp:Klaus-Heiner Lehne2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the original purpose of this directive was to simplify matters, to ensure as part of the ‘SLIM’ programme that the number of European legal texts should be reduced as far as possible and that they should be made easier for the citizen to understand. I have massive doubts as to whether we have really succeeded with this proposal for a directive. As we all know, the European Union has for decades had workable sectoral directives for a whole series of skilled occupations, which were developed specifically to create suitable conditions for recognition in those occupations. If we are now approaching them on the principle that they should all be lumped together and there should be one directive applying as much to master carpenters as to medical consultants and surgeons, then I am convinced that nothing sensible can come of it in the end. That is why the majority of my group wanted to keep the sectoral directives. The fact is that most of the complaints received were not about the regulated areas but about those areas that were not regulated, that is to say, the areas not covered by the sectoral directives. We were unable to get the Committee to accept this view. The result now is obviously that there will have to be a large number of amendments taking more and more elements from the sectoral directives into the general directive. The outcome cannot be described as something that has produced a simplification of legislation in Europe, quite the opposite, it has all become more bureaucratic, more complicated, harder to understand and more inefficient, the opposite of ‘slim’, I would call the directive ‘thick’, to borrow the English word. Not to mention that I do not of course believe it is a good way of legislating to adopt a directive on medical consultants that is then not even implemented in the Member States but rescinded again and finally incorporated into this directive. In short, the consultations were in the end about preventing something worse rather than achieving something good. What the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market has come up with has prevented something worse, but it has not done any good. We will vote in favour of this outcome given that nothing else could be achieved."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph