Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-13-Speech-1-117"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Relocation in the context of regional development (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"cs"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060313.18.1-117"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-03-13-Speech-1-1182
lpv:speaker	lp:Oldřich Vlasák2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; REGI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; TRAN (2004-09-28--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Občanská demokratická strana (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the reason why we are addressing the issue of relocations is an understandable attempt to balance, on the one hand, the impact of the rules of the internal market, with, on the other, support for cohesion policy and ensuring a level playing field for Europe's regions. Let us not forget, however, that we would not have to worry about this problem if all EU principles, including the free movement of services and labour, were being upheld. The fact that basically only the free movement of goods and capital are possible today more or less encourages the relocation of production to areas where costs are lower. Indeed, regional aid must not distort the rules of the internal market, and European regional policy must not encourage company relocations. This is where the intervention of the EU in Europe’s economy should end, however. I do not accept the idea of protecting inflexible businesses and workers. In my view, to block the relocations of companies represents a breach of free movement, which is one of the basic freedoms of the European Community. I disagree with Mrs Schroedter out of principle, and take the view that a five-year period for maintaining operations supported by the Structural Funds is already long enough and that there is no reason to extend it. This period should be tied to the objective of investment for which resources have been earmarked, and should not exceed the real life of the project and its scope. It is wrong to prevent entrepreneurs who want to move to where they have a cheaper, better educated and perhaps better quality workforce. It is also not possible to hold back national governments from trying to attract foreign investment, just as it is impossible to dictate to Member States the level at which they are to collect direct taxes. Ladies and gentlemen, if we attempt to suppress this trend, it will lead to indolence and waste in the EU economy. This is about the free market, and the principles of the free market would trickle away in the face of more stringent regulations on company relocations. As far as relocations are concerned, we should in my view concentrate on company relocations outside the EU, which are the real nightmare scenario."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph