Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-15-Speech-3-046"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061115.3.3-046"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The directive we have in front of us now only contains a fraction of the original text, as almost all areas, including the main principle of country of origin, have been deleted.
We have cut out medical and social services and services of general interest, as well as all references to the temporary posting of workers. These are to be addressed separately on a sectoral basis. However, the question remains as to when and if at all. An empty directive may do no harm, but at the same time it can do no good.
This directive, I would say, is completely useless and does not resolve anything in its current watered-down form. The country-of-origin principle means that a small business from Bratislava may apply Slovak law when serving a customer in Vienna. However, the host Member State will insist on the application of its own legislation if, for example, it is in the interests of public policy, public safety, health protection, environmental protection, etc. This wording of the directive leaves the application of the original principle to the discretion of officials.
It has been proven that the old Member States benefit from cheap and high-quality labour from the ten new Member States, and our nurses, au-pairs or IT experts have proved their worth. However, they are afraid that a nurse providing her services as a small business would generate too much competition and are disguising …"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples