Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-08-Speech-3-318"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050608.22.3-318"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I very much enjoyed listening to all that Mrs Vlasto and Commissioner Verheugen had to say. I cannot comment on what has been said in this Chamber today, however, as I feel obliged to comment on what is written in the report. Unfortunately, I have to say that it does nothing whatsoever to advocate healthy competition, which is the cornerstone of a free economy. Instead, it is riddled through and through with interventionist ideology.
Paragraph 1 reads as follows, ‘[The European Parliament] welcomes the Commission’s decision to make industrial policy a priority of the EU agenda’. I would ask the House to remember that there is no such thing as priorities in a free economy. Society’s needs dictate everything that is necessary in such an economy, and the free market tells us what those needs are. To discuss priorities for the economy would be to neglect the economy as a whole.
To quote paragraph 2, ‘[The European Parliament supports] the promotion of a proactive industrial policy’. With all due respect, if it needs to be said that any aspect of the economy should be proactive, then I have to say that we have taken a very wrong turning indeed. After all, this would imply that we already regard freedom as a non-essential feature of the economy, and yet a free economy is the foundation for success.
Paragraph 5 says, and I quote, ‘social dialogue should help to identify the best-performing sectors’. I would remind the House that deciding whether something is performing well, or whether those running businesses are adhering rather too diligently to healthy free-market principles, is no job for social dialogue.
Moving on to paragraph 6, ‘[The European Parliament] would like to see women encouraged to train for industrial careers’. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a gross corruption of feminist ideals. There is no point in encouraging women to train for industrial careers, since they will find jobs in whichever sector they wish. I see no reason why women should have to work with pneumatic drills.
Paragraph 12 reads as follows, ‘industrial policy should lead to balanced development, by maintaining social cohesion’. I would remind the House that this is the wrong path to take if we wish to achieve competitiveness and success. One hundred and thirty years ago, the then British Prime Minister said that the job of economists was to prevent the government from harming the economy. At the time Britain was the fastest developing country in the world.
I am far from hopeful that the European Commission will follow my advice, but I would call on it to take my comments into consideration, if nothing else."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples