Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-315"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000215.13.2-315"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would, in turn, like to congratulate both the Commission, for making another step in the convergence process with regard to social security, and the rapporteur for the sound report he has compiled.
I endorse this view. I will give my support to the Commission and I hope that Lisbon will take us a step forward in this matter.
The European Union’s policy encompasses social policy in addition to economic and employment policy. So far, social policy has remained limited in terms of set-up and resources. But under the influence of the free movement of employees, of the internal market and of the euro, the labour markets are actually beginning to become integrated. This has undeniable repercussions on social protection which is tied in with labour to a large extent. Cross-border workers, employees on secondment and migrating employees, as well as job-seekers, students on placement and other students, experience hindrances in exercising the right of free movement. This is due to a lack of coordination and a lack of convergence in terms of social protection. In fact, the same phenomenon occurs in tax law.
In order to combat distortion of competition and prevent dumping, the Commission has, in my opinion, developed a well-balanced approach which steers a midcourse between harmonisation and non-intervention.
On the one hand, binding and enforceable rules apply to equal pay or additional old-age pensions and on the other hand, programmes are used to offer incentives with regard to non-discrimination or social exclusion.
Based on a number of recommendations, reports and communications, the Commission has made another step in the convergence process by setting out objectives and by setting up a working party of high-ranking officials.
Both proposals have already been accepted by the Council and it is thus a matter of endorsing this approach in order to be able to make an assessment in time, with knowledge of all facts and/or in order to establish to what extent and in what way social protection should be reorganised in the European Union. Indeed, expansion, globalisation, a sharp increase in the ageing population, individualisation and changes in family situations render such reorganisation inevitable. Denying that such shifts take place is tantamount to surrendering social protection.
With regard to eurosceptics and nationalists, I would say that social protection within the boundaries of a Member State is not social and offers no protection. Indeed, if social protection were to be phased out as a result of competition, this would also harm social protection as a production factor. And less social protection means less purchasing power, fewer healthy employees and fewer happy employees.
In respect of the super-Europeans, I would say that European social protection is neither attainable nor desirable. The discrepancies between the Member States are too immense in terms of provisions, rightful claimants, revenue or benefits, etc. It is thus impossible to bring all States into line.
The path which the Commission is walking is, in fact, obvious. It has the advantage of clarity, and it can collect data and exchange experiences in order to agree on objectives and finely tune solid, comparative indicators and put forward recommendations."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples