Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-11-Speech-3-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061011.16.3-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the matter addressed by Mr Barón Crespo’s question flows from the case of the footwear sector, because the entire production system of Member States has been thrown into a crisis, and not merely from today, by unfair competition – or, to put it more plainly, by the remorseless and unbridled financial greed of the so-called free market: a market that would be better defined as being without rules, which preys on individuals like a vampire, exploiting workers without paying heed to their age and without any social security remotely comparable to that which is in force in countries of the European Union. It is a market with devastating financial interests that impoverishes society and nations, intent on the exponential enrichment of multinational companies.
The trade defences such as anti-dumping measures, and thus the maintenance of tariffs, are the first and the minimum indispensable tool; but they are not entirely satisfactory, since the unfair competition that is in danger of flooding the markets with much cheaper products is the consequence of the huge advantages offered by production factors. Unfair competition should thus be fought not only by defensive means: one cannot attempt to win the war with rearguard battles, and defence does not guarantee victory in war, as strategists even before von Clausewitz have already noted.
If, therefore, the European Union wishes to safeguard its producers, it must impose controls on the products that it aims to promote in the internal market. It is unthinkable to set off prices against production so long as the production factors are so unbalanced in favour of Asian industry – unbalanced in respect of costs not only of labour but also, for example, of administration.
At the start of this parliamentary term, I tabled an oral question in accordance with Article 108, with dozens of signatures in support of colleagues of various nationalities and political leanings. It was obviously not put down for the debate, perhaps because it clashed with the interests of those who, in the name of profit, despise social considerations and the profound importance of employment. I said then - and I remain of the same view - that, as well as imposing restrictions on imports from countries that do not give guarantees as mentioned earlier, it is time to institute a control mechanism that would certify how products imported into Europe are made, whatever non-European country they come from, and that would in consequence authorise or prohibit the trade.
Let us impose a trade mark of ethical certification – ethical as regards employment and the environment and, more generally, ethical as regards the production process. Karl Popper was undoubtedly a supporter of free trade, but he summarised perfectly the extent to which liberty cannot be considered ..."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples