Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-06-Speech-3-224"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Commission fines in antitrust cases (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101006.16.3-224"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-06-Speech-3-2252
lpv:speaker	lp:Antolín Sánchez Presedo2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; PECH (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2010-09-08--2011-07-31)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2009-09-16--2012-02-12)3 member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Partido Socialista Obrero Español (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Commissioner, the subject of fines is a very important one. It is about responding to anti-competitive conduct, and that response must be effective and firm. A weak, inadequate response will be an incentive and stimulus for infringements. Therefore, fines must deter those who infringe the rules but also act as a general deterrent for all operators. It must be clear that illegal competition is not going to provide any advantages or benefits for those who do it. It is true that the Commission has a broad margin of discretion in the application of fines. However, discretion does not mean acting arbitrarily, because there are rules, limits and criteria, there is a procedure with guarantees and, in any case, there is judicial control. The treaty, Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the 2006 guidelines and the Communication on the leniency programme – also from 2006 – all constitute a framework that is working reasonably well. The system could, however, be improved. Experience of applying the system, recommendations from experts and the concerns legitimately expressed by institutions and some operators advise us to tackle certain issues. Transparency and predictability could be improved and its impact on small and medium-sized businesses, employment and the sustainability of businesses could also be discussed. Flexibility regarding the amount and payments should also be considered, along with the connection with leniency programmes, and even how to overcome the differences between the systems in the various Member States. Moreover, the system would be complete if other relevant tools were added: for example, stressing individual liability, considering other types of remedy – not only in order to put an end to anti-competitive conduct, but also to prevent it from re-occurring – and launching private actions for compensation for both individuals and groups. All these issues must be tackled rigorously, systematically and positively, without raising doubts about the way that competition policy works."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph