Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-12-Speech-4-099"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040212.5.4-099"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, when I hear the discussion in this Chamber, I start to wonder what we are actually debating. For two years, Parliament has been demanding more legal clarity, and Commissioner Monti wants to create legal clarity on key issues. It is surely an illusion to believe that we can now suddenly enact the amendments envisaged in the Constitution on our own and bring competition law into line with the proposed article on the internal market. The fact is, Mr Herzog, that we spent months discussing that, and you did not obtain a majority for your proposals. You did not get majority support for the idea of rolling back sectoral liberalisation. You did not obtain a majority for your renewed demands for a framework directive. There was no majority behind your call for standardised European services of general interest. Now you are touting these ideas all over again. All I can say is that you either have no idea what Mr Monti is trying to do or you are seeking to overturn your defeat of four weeks ago. I cannot conceive of any other reasons.
Mr Swoboda, as he said himself, is truly an expert on foreign affairs. On matters of competition law, though – you would do better to keep a low profile Mr Swoboda – because you have not grasped the views of the House as reflected in the voting figures. If we call for legal clarity, as we did, and Mr Monti presents a proposal – which takes full account of subsidiarity, Mrs Flautre – your objections leave me wondering what you actually want. Mr Monti proposes that subsidies of less than EUR 15 million a year paid to businesses with an annual turnover of less than EUR 40 million should in future be the sole responsibility of the Member States. If they no longer require approval, this surely means more freedom for the Member States. This is the legal clarity we want. I fail to understand the point of all the discussion here.
Approval need no longer be sought for the awarding of aid for housing construction and for hospitals. I cannot fathom the debate here, because this is surely part of what we have been demanding. For this reason, all I can say is that, if Mr Monti’s proposal as I understand it enters into force, it will do so on the basis of the EC Treaty in its present form, which empowers him to enact such legislation without submitting it to codecision. He is acting to ensure that subsidiarity is strengthened, and he is acting to ensure that legal clarity will prevail in important areas by the end of the current legislative term of the European Parliament. We do not want to give our blessing here to state aid for the likes of Electricité de France or Volkswagen, but grants to small and medium-sized businesses, including regional grants, are to fall within the ambit of the Member States in future, and Mr Monti intends to open up that possibility. Before we spend another three years debating a White Paper and framework legislation, he is making things happen. I can only heartily welcome the fact that greater legal clarity will finally prevail in these matters before the end of this parliamentary term."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples