Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-311"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000215.13.2-311"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, like my fellow MEP, Bartho Pronk, please allow me to thank the Commission for this communication and, in particular, to congratulate our rapporteur for the work he has put into this report. Commissioner, the fact that this report is no longer controversial within Parliament does not mean that it has lost any of its crucial importance. There have been times within this Parliament when such discussions on social security were actually quite awkward. It is also a timely discussion – as Mr Pronk said just a moment ago – at a time when preparations are in full swing for the Lisbon Summit, which intends to find out how we can put economic growth, employment and social cohesion on the agenda in Europe via the Information Society. Within my group, it speaks for itself that social protection forms an important part of this social cohesion and should thus also be added to the agenda in Lisbon.
My group is pleased that the Social Affairs Council gave the go-ahead for a better cooperation strategy as early on as the end of last year and that, in fact, a group of high-ranking officials has already been commissioned to submit to the Council an initial report by June 2000. However, we, the Parliament and, in particular, the group of the Social Democrats, want Lisbon to go one step further now. It is of great importance that, in our fellow MEP’s report, this European Parliament advocates a true European strategy of social convergence, based on what provisions have been made for employment via the so-called Luxembourg strategy, that is to say it should encompass common goals, guidelines, national action plans and performance evaluations.
We believe that this course of action is ambitious, yet achievable. Needless to say, it is clear that harmonisation of social security is not viable at European level. The financial and organisational systems vary too greatly for this, and this is also an important reason why social protection has only just been put on the European agenda, and why, in fact, scenarios such as Danny Peters’ thirteenth Member State or the European social snake have scarcely got off the ground. But this new course of action is very exciting. The employment strategy has proved that it can function well and social convergence is also necessary, for our social security systems are facing the same challenges, and in an EMU era, social security systems would otherwise threaten to fall prey to social competition.
But let me make one thing clear on behalf of my group: social convergence strategies should not be an alternative to social legislation. They can merely serve as an extremely useful complement to what we are developing and expecting from the Commission in terms of social legislation.
I think that it also a good thing if, moreover, the European Parliament tried to convince the Council to substantiate the common strategy as early on as in Lisbon and to launch an annual procedure to reduce poverty levels no later than at the beginning of 2001. I am pleased about the fact that the European Parliament supports my group’s idea and we hope, Commissioner, that we can also count on your support.
Finally, we urge the European Parliament, both sides of industry and social NGOs to be closely involved in this process. The success of this strategy hinges on a broad and democratic base and we hope that we can count on your support."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples