Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-03-Speech-3-308"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020703.10.3-308"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I too should like to congratulate Mr Berenguer Fuster on what I consider to be an excellent report. I can identify with it very well, less so in the case of the amendments which he tabled before the plenary session, but more on this later.
The Green Paper on the control of mergers outlines the way in which merger control will take place in Europe in the next couple of years. It is valuable to check the existing rules and to carry out reforms where necessary. There was a great deal of criticism from companies on the application procedures, particularly in the case of transnational mergers. The absence of mutual harmonisation between the Member States leads to bureaucratic, costly and time-consuming procedures. The solution presented by the Commission strikes me as excellent: a One-Stop Shop in Brussels for multiple applications in more than two Member States. As far as I am concerned, the One-Stop Shop should also apply to applications in more than one Member State. An application in Brussels not only costs less, it also considerably enhances legal certainty.
It is to be welcomed that cooperation between the Member States in the area of the control of mergers is now finally starting to take shape. Needless to say, the new Member States should be involved in this too. Let us hope that this cooperation between the Member States leads to less bureaucracy and equal procedures and criteria.
We would also urge the Commission, in respect of the One-Stop Shop’s equivalent, the referral by the Commission to the Member States on the basis of Article 9, to display the necessary restraint. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs clearly stated in the report that referral back is, and should, only be possible with the consent of the companies involved. This too is in the interest of legal certainty. The control of mergers monitors their effect within the market. New structures are created, and the effect of these structures within the market is central to the control by the Commission. This involves an economic system whereby the assessment criteria, which, in my view, also include improving efficiency, are based on competition law. My group is therefore opposed to all amendments that aim to extend the assessment criteria, with, for example, implications for employment and other social aspects. This does not belong in the regulation on the control of concentrations.
The same applies to the amendments with a trade-political content tabled by Mr Herzog. The control of concentrations is not about reinforcing European industries or setting up strong industries. The strongest industries and the strongest companies are the result of tougher competition, which is precisely what the control on concentrations sets out to achieve.
I have already pointed out that I set great store by the legal certainty of companies in procedures of this kind. Using a range of criteria can lead to conflicting conclusions. For the same reason, we are also opposed to more collegiality in the decision-making process concerning mergers. Enormous investments are involved. Companies are entitled to prompt and simplified procedures. The Green Paper by the European Commission sets the right tone."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples