Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-14-Speech-3-241"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010214.7.3-241"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, first of all I should like to thank Mr Rocard for his support for the Commission proposal to extend Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 to third-country nationals. The Commission also thanks him for his support for Articles 42 and 308 of the Treaty as suitable legal bases for this objective.
An extension of this nature, in my opinion, is fully consistent with Community policy, particularly if you take into account the conclusions of the Tampere European Council on the situation of third-country nationals who reside legally in the Member States. The Commission therefore regrets the fact that the Council has not yet been able to support this and other Commission proposals to amend the Regulation and, in particular, the global proposal to simplify and modernise it.
We are delighted at what we have just heard Minister Danielsson say in this respect, and we hope his wishes come true over the next few months. The Commission insists that the Council should intensify the debates on the proposals mentioned and is grateful for Parliament’s support on this matter. This leads me to Mrs Lambert’s report; I offer her my most sincere thanks for her highly constructive contribution to the Commission proposal.
Our proposal is a technical proposal, aiming as you well know at filling gaps in legislation due to changes in national social security laws. Community coordination of national social security systems is a means to foster the free movement of workers, and in order to guarantee that this coordination works properly the amendments to national legislation also require the amendment of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71; this is basically what it is about.
The proposals made by Mrs Lambert, whom we thank for her support, are very useful since they clarify the Commission’s original proposal and make it more specific. I can agree fully with the proposals contained in Amendments Nos 1 to 7 in the report. I also agree with the general idea that underlies the two additional amendments that have been tabled in the House, Nos 9 and 10. Their aim is to extend the right to sickness benefit to frontier workers, and if I have understood correctly, to expand the Regulation to cover early retirement benefit.
In fact the Commission included the same provisions in its 1998 proposal for the simplification and modernisation of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71. The amendments that concern us now, however, propose a substantial change to the Regulation and clearly go beyond the technical nature of the update proposed by the Commission, and in my opinion the debate on the technical update should not be confused with a debate on the substantial amendments.
Therefore the Commission cannot accept the other additional amendments on supplementary pensions. With regard to Amendment No 8, I should like simply to underline the fact that the Commission has agreed to submit a proposal this year on its transferability.
To sum up, therefore, we can accept Amendments Nos 1 to 7, but we cannot accept Amendments Nos 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13.
May I thank you all, and especially Mrs Lambert, for your general support for the Commission’s proposal."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples