Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-03-13-Speech-2-066"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070313.7.2-066"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I can express neither enthusiasm nor disappointment, but I feel it is appropriate to acknowledge the pragmatism with which the Commissioner and the Commission concluded this negotiation phase. Certainly, we would all have preferred a general agreement also covering the ownership, control and opening-up of the US domestic market. It is clear, however, that this preference conflicts with the highly important fact that we approached the negotiations in question with two aims in mind: an internal aim and an external aim.
These aims reflect a need and an interest: a need to put an end to the discrimination inside the European Union caused by having accepted the existence of such distinct markets and the possibility of bilateral agreements, which create unjust situations within the Community – something that the European Court of Justice has prohibited. Evidently, this need, which concerns Europe only, to put an end to the discrimination has weakened our ability to negotiate with the United States.
From this we can realistically conclude that this first stage is undoubtedly ‘internal’, and in this light it is simple to predict the result of any impact assessment: there will be some countries, companies and airports that will be adversely affected by this agreement, and others that will benefit from it. The fact remains, however, that we are reducing monopolistic powers in favour of an equitable opening to all, in all countries and throughout Europe. I believe that this must be considered a positive aim.
Secondly, I would like to draw attention to the issue of security and safety, with reference both to ownership and to the opening-up of the internal market. It is clear that, for the United States, this may represent a valid reason or an excuse. We must remove any element of excuse. Agreement on security and safety rules must be paramount, to enable this issue to be resolved, since a solution to this problem would invalidate every other argument on insecurity attributable to the foreign ownership of companies within the United States, or on insecurity attributable to the opening-up of the internal market.
I would also point out that, in the United States, security as a whole comes under the federal budget, and from this point of view it would be useful for Europe to reflect on the way in which we approach the subject."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples