Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-09-Speech-1-109"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040209.7.1-109"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner Diamantopoulou, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank Mr Modrow for the pertinence of his report since the idea is clearly to subordinate everything to the fight against poverty. It must be said, however, that one of the two Commission Communications – the one entitled ‘reform of state-owned enterprises in developing countries with focus on public utilities: the need to assess all the options’ – made for more than thought-provoking, but at the same time welcome, reading for me. Indeed, we read that numerous liberalisations and privatisations that were carried out quickly in developing countries, under the pressure of structural adjustment plans that are often imposed, have had disastrous consequences in terms of job losses and the deterioration, and increase in price, of the services concerned. We would like the Commission to show similar clarity and objectivity when dealing with services of general interest within the European Union itself.
As is called for in the draft report, an initial step in this direction would be for the Commission to finally agree to carry out a transparent, public and openly debated assessment of the effect of liberalisation on employment, on the quality and the extent of the services provided and on working conditions in Europe. This would be just as beneficial internally as it would be in terms of better understanding the state of affairs in the southern countries. As I say, our objective is clearly to combat poverty and ensure that this is not just all talk.
When we look more closely at the various examples quoted in the Communication, we can see that among the positive experiences are cases in which State-owned enterprises have remained State-owned but in which mismanagement and corruption have been combated, the enterprise has gained renewed dynamism and effectiveness in its management and, above all, a regulatory and political framework has been implemented, which has clear objectives that are ambitious in terms of development, accessibility and quality of service and that are, in particular, financed by tariff adjustment.
These different elements do not amount to a commercialisation of the State-owned enterprise according to the Commission’s definition but, instead, constitute, in my view, factors for good management of public utilities, which we also need to establish at European level, perhaps through a framework directive.
A final point is that those in favour of the general liberalisation of utilities though the GATS claim that opening up public utilities in developing countries can only benefit them. A more pragmatic analysis should favour a different economic development strategy: one that is centred on the local economic and social actors and small- and micro-enterprises – with account being taken, in particular, of women and basic public utilities – and one that, above all, does not hand such enterprises over to the reckless appetites of the multinationals. Excuse me at this point, however, for I think we are talking about ethics."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples