Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-23-Speech-1-066"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001023.7.1-066"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, there really is a need for a social agenda in Europe after many years of neo-liberal economic policy which has lead to unemployment and social exclusion everywhere, including in my own affluent country, Sweden. Begging has returned to our large towns after having disappeared from them as long ago as the immediate post-war years. Even the private charitable organisations and their soup kitchens appear to be needed again. I must therefore welcome the purpose of the Commission’s work and of Mrs Van Lancker’s report. Many of her proposals are extremely commendable and deserve our full support.
Genuine social initiatives cost a lot of money, a factor which I think is discussed far too little in the report. These resources must come mainly from the Member States. It is therefore the social authorities in each country upon whom demands must essentially be made. Governments must set aside more resources, more social workers must be appointed and more resources must be given to the voluntary social organisations. Otherwise, the result will be fine words without any practical content.
Mrs Van Lancker’s report presents the Commission and its legislation as the real engine of social work. I believe that the impetus must come from below and that it is a question of providing aid at a problem level. The Commission can obviously make an important contribution, but the social problems have their roots in local conditions and must be handled with great sensitivity for the practical conditions concerned. The Commission can help set a high standard, but it is social workers, the unions and voluntary activists we must pin our hopes on, and not officials in Brussels.
Finally, I would just add that I am not a co-author of Amendment No 35 as stated in the document with the amendments. On the contrary, I am very critical of the amendment. The name Figueiredo should be there instead of my own name. The Secretariat must have made a mistake, and I would ask for this to be corrected."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples