Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-029"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060117.5.2-029"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, we have a slightly original debate in store for us tomorrow since the Committee on Transport and Tourism has done a procedural ‘u-turn’. We will therefore have to give our verdict on the raw text, that is to say on Mrs de Palacio’s ‘legacy’ text – the poisoned chalice she bestowed on the European Commission. Personally, I will be voting against it, not because – as everyone can confirm – I am particularly radical, but for three reasons.
Firstly, I will be voting against the text because we do not have to accept a denial of parliamentary democracy. We cannot encourage the Commission to reproduce the same texts every time Parliament has voted against them, nor can we encourage it not to listen or to hear anything and to proceed on the basis of a mystical form of ultraliberalism that flouts everyone’s opinions, including those of the professionals.
Secondly, I will be voting against it because this text is socially unacceptable and dangerous. It comes down to legalising the same kind of serfdom in the ports that is rife on the seas. Through self-handling by onboard personnel, it comes down to encouraging our ports to employ Filipinos and Malays in order to be competitive. In reality, it comes down to admitting that
was right in June.
It is politically irresponsible because we withdrew a directive on crews, which was a social directive, and we are keeping the port services directive; because, in the context of the ‘better lawmaking’ initiative, we withdrew 60 European Parliament texts in the course of proceedings, yet we are keeping the port services directive; and because, in actual fact, this text gives food for thought and proves all the card-carrying Eurosceptics and those most fervently opposed to Europe, right. As someone who fought to see Europe exist, I, for my part, believe that this is an insult to us.
Commissioner, I know what your feelings are and I think that the problems related to Europe’s ports are problems to do with the excessive concentration in the North Sea, with saturation, with the disorganisation of road traffic flows on the continent, with the security of the straits – one can see what took place again in the Pas-de-Calais – and with national and regional development. A port is primarily a site. It is a strategic site; it is not a free-for-all service; it is not a supermarket. You need to think along these lines in future when you design the new initiative."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples