Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-04-Speech-4-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991104.4.4-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, cooperation within the EU on economic policy has now been taken further. EMU has been successful in the sense that, once the various countries had established common goals concerning inflation, interest rates and budget deficits, it emerged that coordination of this kind led to the objectives also being achieved. Inflation is now low, levels of interest are low and budget deficits are either low or have disappeared altogether. However, cooperation of this kind in the economic sphere is much too one-sided. We therefore pursued the question of cooperation in the employment field too, with a view to its having the same importance as cooperation in the economic field. This became possible through the Amsterdam Treaty and by the fact that the Luxembourg process had been set in motion.
Now we are to discuss the guidelines for next year, that is to say for the year 2000. The Commission has no doubt been right to base these guidelines upon last year’s and to ensure that no unduly large changes are introduced from year to year. We still think, however, that increased clarity in a number of areas would be no bad thing. Let me mention a few such areas.
Firstly, there must be more coordination between the formulation of the economic guidelines and that of the employment policy guidelines. Secondly, as Mrs Van Lancker also mentioned, we must have clearer objectives when it comes to increasing the level of employment and reducing long-term unemployment. It is important that, in these areas, we establish objectives and have a system of benchmarking
for the future so that we can achieve the objectives concerned.
I want, however, to concentrate mainly upon the social security systems. In Amendment No 1, we say that we especially urge that a strategy be created for social convergence which is analogous to the Luxembourg process regarding employment and with the help of which it can be ensured that the goal of social cohesion is given priority in the development of economic and employment policies. That is not the first time we have said this. Rather, this Parliament said much the same thing in connection with the Pronk report too. It was sensible then, and it is sensible now, to support this. Mr Pronk said previously that we cannot always support Social Democratic proposals. No, I can understand that, but one might at least support one’s own proposals. Those which were sensible a year ago are just as sensible today.
What is the connection, then, between economic development, employment and the social security systems? In fact, there is a connection in as much as economic stability is necessary for an increase in employment, and high employment is necessary to safeguard the social security systems.
Finally, does this not conflict with the principle of subsidiarity? The answer is no. If we look at the way in which employment strategy has been formulated, the objectives are shared but policy is formulated at local level. The same will be true when we aim at social convergence. We shall establish a number of common objectives in terms of combating poverty, establishing sustainable pension systems, securing good health care for all and designing a system which stimulates employment. None of this conflicts with the principle of subsidiarity."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples