Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-28-Speech-4-051"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20050428.6.4-051"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, first of all I would like to thank Mrs Handzlik, the rapporteur, for her all-encompassing research, and I have to say that the report shows that, one year after they have become part of the European Union internal market, all in all the situation in the new Member States with regard to the adoption of legislation does not seem any worse than in the older Member States. We can see an almost equal proportion of positive and negative examples in both the older and the new Member States. Business people in the new Member States are still having difficulties in acquiring the operating mechanism of the internal market, particularly in sectors which are not harmonised. In the harmonised spheres, however, the infrastructure for conformity assessment is not always accessible to them in their own countries for the products which they produce. I could go on enumerating separate problems, but these cannot eclipse the achievements of the European Union’s internal market. However, even relatively recently, we heard concerns being expressed in all the countries that were then still EU applicant countries that the free movement of goods might be disastrous for economies experiencing the shocks of a change of economic system. Industry that was still weak would not be able to withstand the competition of powerful producers in EU Member States. Certainly, many businesses in the new Member States that had not consolidated their position in the market went bankrupt as a result of competitive pressure from businesses in the older Member States, but business activity has of course not decreased. Quite the contrary: the increase in competition has activated the market, and consumers have, of course, gained from this. We can observe a surprising degree of similarity between the opinions of that time about the threats the European Union common market might pose to the new Member States and today’s debates about the possible threats posed by the European Union services directive to the older Member States. The most striking similarity in these debates is the way consumers’ interests are being ignored. The consumer is not being listened to. It is the opinion of businesses who are worried about a possible increase in competition that is being expressed. The first amendment tabled on today’s agenda, to reject the country of origin principle for services in the internal market, is in point of fact equivalent to a proposal to reject the internal market. The country of origin principle is the ruling principle in European Union internal market legislation, and the decisions of the European Court of Justice have confirmed this. In those service sectors where competition currently exists, the market gains from additional competition and, of course, the consumer also gains. Currently, even successful small and medium-sized enterprises in Member States are prevented from crossing the borders of their own countries in order to offer services in other Member States because of the high financial and bureaucratic costs. The application of the country of origin principle to the provision of services would open up the European Union internal market to the most important service providers in the Member States, that is small and medium-sized enterprises. Arguments about the threat to the European social model are completely rebutted by the directive adopted almost ten years ago concerning the placement of workers in the services sector. Consumers wish to obtain goods and services of the highest possible quality and for the lowest possible price, but the best way to ensure this is a competitive market and the European Union internal ..."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph