Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-13-Speech-3-383"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050413.24.3-383"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, in less than three weeks’ time it will be a year since the enlargement of the European Union. For millions of citizens of Central Europe, enlargement meant the fulfilment of dreams about a common Europe governed by fair principles and with equal opportunities for all.
In preparation for enlargement the new countries opened their markets wide, allowing in a flow of Western companies, goods, services and workers. This often took place against a background of heated internal debate and despite strong protests by many groups, mainly those representing workers. The latter feared the loss of their jobs and argued strongly that national markets should be protected from unfair Western competition. Nonetheless, we felt that above all membership of the European Union meant being part of the common market in which freedom to undertake economic activity anywhere on the territory of the Union is guaranteed. At the same time, we were convinced that the European treaties laid down fair rules for all actors, regardless of their country of origin. Unfortunately, over the last 11 months there have been numerous instances of discrimination against entrepreneurs from the new countries wishing to undertake economic activity in some of the countries of the so-called old Union, and also against their employees.
The most blatant cases of discrimination are taking place in the Netherlands, Austria and Italy. The legal systems of those countries allow companies and workers to be treated differently depending on whether they come from the so-called old Fifteen or the new Ten. A specific example is the requirement imposed on the latter to apply for permits for expatriate workers even before the start of economic activity. This is a very time-consuming procedure that can take up to six weeks in Austria, and the requirement is imposed only on companies and workers from the new countries. Economic entities from the old Fifteen are not required to present applications of this kind. Instead, they are simply required to notify the relevant authorities and provide them with a single sheet of information and a list of expatriate workers. They can begin to provide services immediately without any unnecessary delay. Should the authorities wish to undertake checks, these may take place whilst work is in progress, without interfering with the company’s economic activity. This is a clear example of discrimination sanctioned by national law, resulting in violation of the conditions for fair competition in the common Union market.
There are also a number of other countries where although there are no formal discriminatory provisions, the administration and officials behave in such a way that, in practice, it is impossible for companies from the new Member States to exercise their activity freely.
I have with me a collection of complaints from entrepreneurs who received particularly unfortunate treatment, even though they had complied with all the formal requirements. The kind of treatment both the owners of the firms and their workers were subjected to whilst their work was in progress includes having their hands stamped, being handcuffed, having dogs set on them and even being arrested for no good reason. I am sorry to have to say that Germany and France are countries where this kind of treatment is imposed all too often.
I would therefore like to ask the Commissioner what action the Commission intends to take to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Treaty regarding equal treatment for companies and citizens? Has the Commission already undertaken an audit of the provisions in Member States with a view to ensuring a level playing field for economic entities from the new Member States? If so, what was the outcome? If not, when will this audit of legal provisions and practices be undertaken so as to prevent discrimination?
I should also like to draw attention to a view shared by a large number of my fellow Members. We feel that unless the Commission becomes actively involved in combating discrimination against companies and workers from the new Member States, we shall fail to achieve the economic objectives identified in the Lisbon Strategy.
In conclusion, I should like to say that I trust the European Commission is aware of this situation. Commissioner Verheugen’s presence in the House today in his capacity as Vice-President of the Commission gives me reason to hope that this is indeed the case."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples