Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-06-Speech-4-085"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000706.5.4-085"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the Commission report, which I have read in great detail, says: "In general terms Directive 92/85/EEC has been well implemented by the Member States and this is reflected in the low level of complaints about the rights of pregnant workers received by the Commission". The rapporteur has set this all to one side, effectively saying it is irrelevant, claiming that the original directive just did not go far enough.
I like some of the suggestions in her report. I congratulate her for the enthusiasm with which she has pursued her agenda. But in general it is not a health and safety agenda. It is very much a traditional socialist agenda.
Firstly, her report aims to harmonise social policy across the EU rather than leave the detail to Member States – a point made with great force by Mr Olle Schmidt earlier in this debate. Secondly, it wants to improve the terms and conditions of employment for pregnant workers and new mothers by way of extra maternity leave and specified minimum pay levels. Neither of these are really health and safety issues. She is proposing solutions for which there is no health and safety problem.
As British Conservatives we confirm our concern about health and safety for all workers, especially vulnerable groups. We confirm our commitment to subsidiarity regarding terms and conditions of employment. But we also confirm our concern to help more women into jobs rather than putting up further barriers to female employment. Hence we urge the House to reject the report."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples