Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-028"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.2.2-028"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, a White Paper, by definition, is not something you can take or leave. It is there to generate reactions and the White Paper has certainly succeeded in doing that. It forms a sound basis for discussion and is to be welcomed in this sense. I understand where the authors are coming from and I share their views. I also assume that you, Commissioner, want to honour the reputation of, and the work put in by, your predecessors and that your offices will pursue the same objective. I cannot imagine the Commission taking initiatives in order to de-Europeanise or re-nationalise in a thorough manner, but I have my concerns and questions nevertheless.
Firstly, these relate to the coherence of the policy’s application. In general, I am a great defender of cultural diversity but not in terms of competitiveness within the internal market. The internal market needs a uniform competition policy, not only in terms of concept, but also in terms of application. It is true, there are some European regulations and interpretative statements on the way. The Commission is also said to have the right of evocation and can give guidelines to the national competition authorities. But I still wonder if we do not run the risk of ending up in a kind of Echternach procession where we will have to take one step back before we are able to take two steps forward. So, I would like to hear more about how the Commission will guarantee this uniform application in practice and whether you yourself consider the courses outlined from point one hundred onwards in the White Paper to be feasible.
Secondly, I understand the worry of industry regarding legal certainty. Many dossiers are currently being filed with precisely this concern. This instrument will fall by the wayside in future. In the White Paper, you state that the Commission will still issue particular orders which can be used as guidelines, but what will your criteria be for granting such orders one day but not the next?
Thirdly, I would like to know whether the Commission has looked into the effects its new approach will have on industrial strategy. I have particular concerns regarding the fate of SMEs which will lose part of their legal and financial protection, as is already the case, one has got to admit, within the new vertical group exemption for the distribution sector.
Fourthly, I would like to be informed of why the Commission does not choose to apply the invalidity penalty in the case of evident infringements of the competition rules.
Fifthly, with the pending enlargement, I wonder whether the candidate counties will be able to play our game. They are still in training, as it were. What guarantees do we have that they will grow into first-class players in the league of the internal market?
Sixthly and lastly, I would remind you of a point that I have already raised in my report on vertical restrictions, namely the legal privilege of company lawyers. If the Commission implements the White Paper objectives, it seems to me that discrimination within the internal market and between external and internal legal advisers will become more pronounced and hence even less acceptable. Is the Commission considering taking any action to allow in-house lawyers in all Member States legal privilege?
Commissioner, I am asking these questions as a defender of the internal market and I hope that, in this sense, we are all partners and that the discussion between these partners does not remain sterile but can bear fruit."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples