Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-12-Speech-3-363"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080312.24.3-363"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the President-in-Office of the European Union and the Commissioners tend to begin their interventions with declarations on the protection and support of economic freedoms, freedom of competition and SMEs. The transition from declarations to details generally involves reports similar to the one we are debating today, however.
The report proposes imposing a single rate of excise duty on all Member States and harmonisation of prices, on the pretext of making things more straightforward, easier and fairer. This is taking place against the background of a premise considered
to be correct, namely that the best solution for the Member States of the European Union is a single tax system, a single monetary system, a single system for certification and marketing, a single regulatory production limits system and so on.
The proposal states that there are no differences in the cost of fuel supply within the Union, regardless of distance from sources of supply or labour costs. All this is simply untrue. I should like to pose the question as to what economic freedom and freedom of competition within the European Union actually mean. Should we not be referring instead to economic compulsion and force? Is it not the case that a single fuel price eliminating all competition is the ideal solution for multinational fuel enterprises to the detriment of consumers and small enterprises? Is it not the case that a single fuel price favours highly developed countries over less developed ones? Finally, if the Union adopts the aforementioned report, harmonising fuel prices under the slogan of unshackling enterprises and countries, will this not amount in fact to shackling them anew by way of taxation? Worse, will it not simultaneously drive them barefoot into poverty? We shall be voting against the report."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples