Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-07-10-Speech-2-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070710.5.2-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the reform of the postal market is a very sensitive issue, because the impact of the market opening will, of course, be different in every country, depending on the geography, the level of urbanisation or the quantity of mail which people tend to send. It is also, as Mr Simpson said, a network of people with which everyone comes into contact.
I have mixed feelings about the compromise that is the subject of tomorrow’s vote. On the one hand, it is certainly the case that, in terms of key areas, it is far removed from the original Commission proposal and from the rapporteur’s position. I am grateful to Mr Ferber for his flexibility in this respect.
The definition of universal provision of service has remained intact. The deadline has been extended by two years. By this date, the Member States will need to notify which model of funding they think likely; and, socially, we have managed to ensure that, via the licensing scheme, the same wage and working conditions can be imposed on all operators. This is essential.
Many question marks remain, though. Is sustainable funding of the universal provision of service possible in a fully liberalised market? Under all circumstances? Unless we assume, of course, that the taxpayer will foot the bill. We have received insufficient guarantees on that score. I think it would have been preferable if, instead of focusing on a date and before deciding on going ahead with liberalisation, we had first checked in every country whether the opening up of the market would be the best way of further modernising the system and guaranteeing quality provision of service.
The compromise is a step forward, but is not enough. There is still work to be done. The ball is too much in the court of the Member States, and consequently I shall definitely be supporting some amendments that did not get adopted in the committee but were re-tabled by the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, among others."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples