Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-07-10-Speech-2-046"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070710.5.2-046"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like first of all to congratulate Mr Ferber both on the considerable efforts he has made for several months, and even several years, and also for being so open and willing to listen because, as he knows, we have not always shared the same points of view on this complex issue.
At a time when Parliament is preparing to vote on the last stage of postal liberalisation, that of mail weighing less than 50 grams, I should like to say I am pleased about what seems to me to be an advance for users. Competition is, indeed, synonymous with improvement in service, as is demonstrated by the efforts towards modernisation undertaken by several national postal monopolies since they have known that they will have to compete with new operators in their national market.
Competition is also synonymous with improvement in competitiveness for a sector with a turnover that is going down and which, if nothing is done, will collapse under the deficits and will ultimately lose all its appeal in the eyes of users. I do not want to give any specific example, but we all have in mind examples of countries where the public sector no longer operates properly the postal service to which users are entitled.
That being so, if tomorrow we confirm the last stage of liberalisation, competition is not for me an end in itself. It must remain a means of service to users, and I am glad that the text voted for by the European Parliament explicitly states that delivery of mail to every citizen of the European Union, wherever he may live, is an obligatory principle. I am also glad that the text explicitly states that the operator who is to take on the universal service, and who will therefore have increased costs, will be able to be financed by levies on the activities of its competitors who are not subject to the same obligations, that is, it will be able to be financed, if necessary, and why not, by public subsidies. This type of financing will be legal and every Member State will be able to have recourse to it. To what extent? That is the question that the second reading and the time until effective liberalisation must allow us to answer.
For my part, I repeat a request to the European Commission that I made in parliamentary committee and by means of a written question without receiving any answer: when does it intend to publish guidelines for calculating the cost of the universal service? Members of Parliament as well as Member States need to know what are the Commission’s directions as to what it does or does not regard as participating in the universal service. When all is said and done, we shall need clarification on this point before the second reading if we are to continue to support this text."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples