Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-16-Speech-4-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060216.15.4-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Ever since the Lisbon European Council in March 2000, at which France was represented by Mr Chirac and Mr Jospin and which has since been eclipsed by the work of the ‘Internal Market’ Council and by the Berger and Harbour parliamentary reports - both of which were adopted with the full backing of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats and the Socialist Group in the European Parliament - the European liberals, conservatives and socialists have been the ones truly pushing for the so-called Bolkestein Directive.
As far as this affair is concerned, the Lisbon European Council was merely the wholesale reflection of a political class ideologically set on having the internal market in services implemented as quickly as possible.
When the people of the Netherlands and France suddenly took a stand to protect their social entitlements by rejecting the draft European Constitution, they thankfully stopped the time bomb constituted by the untrammelled liberalisation of services.
The Left, which embroiled itself in the mess of liberal Europeanism, is now drowning in a sea of pathetic confusion and internal contradictions.
The amended version of the Services Directive proposed to us only modifies the form of the text, without touching its content. This directive, whether amended or not, is bad, because the proposed strategy on the internal market is fundamentally harmful.
It is therefore on the basis of national and social considerations that we reject the Gebhardt report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples