Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-22-Speech-2-026"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050222.4.2-026"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, Mr Goebbels' report is a frank admission of much that is wrong with the European Union. He has recognised that high economic growth is necessary to achieve low unemployment, to pay pensions and to achieve what is here called 'social cohesion' or 'social protection'.
So why is growth so poor? Several speakers have blamed the Stability and Growth Pact. Some say it is being interpreted too strictly and that governments are not spending enough. Others say the opposite, that we must stick to the Pact more tightly. They cannot both be right. I suggest that both sides are missing the point.
Mr Goebbels says we will raise growth by promoting competition, enterprise, entrepreneurship, initiative, and risk-taking, particularly among small- and medium-sized enterprises. Let me analyse this. I agree that small businesses are important; large multinationals have all the influence, but create jobs outside the EU. However, I do not believe there is a shortage of small business opportunities, investment capital, or entrepreneurs who would be prepared to take risks in setting up businesses and taking on employees. So why is this not happening? And why, when it does happen, do so many fail? It is because we have gone out of our way to make it hard for them.
Go and talk to small businessmen. You will hear the same story repeated everywhere: too much red tape and too many rules, particularly those connected with employing people. These difficulties occur because the whole spirit of the EU is to use centralised direction in a vain attempt to achieve an idealised society by making laws and restricting activity. Examples of this include the Working Time Directive and the large numbers of rules introduced to uphold various rights, each of which has the major effects of crushing enterprise and enriching lawyers. The whole ethos is biased against the employer.
We all want high employment and to live in a compassionate, cohesive society. However, this is only possible when we have wealth. In trying to achieve our ideals by means of coercion, we kill off the source of our wealth. The whole model is in drastic need of revision.
My colleagues in the other British political parties still cling to the idea that they will be able to persuade the European Union to change its ways. In the UK Independence Party we have recognised that this will not be possible. The only way to preserve some prosperity in Britain is to leave the EU. We want our EU neighbours to prosper too, but when they fail to do so because of blind adherence to a flawed model we would prefer not to be dragged down with them."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Whittaker (IND/DEM )"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples