Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-31-Speech-4-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010531.2.4-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, although EURES was created in 1993, as the successor to the old SEDOC, few people are even aware that it exists. Few people know what EURES does, which is to help people looking for work in another Union country or employers to recruit applicants in another country. Few people understand what EURES could mean for the future.
Our first recommendation, therefore, seeks to publicise EURES and its database more intensively, which must be reflected in its budget, in its activity plan and in the implementation of its budget and also in the various Member States, where it should be monitored and followed up appropriately by their public employment services, which are now linked by means of EURES.
EURES is a network of networks, consisting of around 500 ‘Euroadvisers’, public and private organisations and partners and provides a valuable opportunity for direct consultation via the Internet in an open network. It seeks to promote the transparency of the European market by providing information, advice and placement help. EURES covers not only the Union, but also the European Economic Area and currently includes 17 countries. In short, it seeks to promote the effective exercise of the right to free movement of workers and encourage mobility, which we consider not to be a political end in itself, but rather the need to respond to people’s spontaneous requests.
All of this makes little sense, however, if people are fundamentally unaware of its existence. The first priority is, therefore, to promote and to publicise this programme. As a matter of fact, as a result of growing Internet use, the efficiency of EURES will increasingly depend on the widespread knowledge of the general public and much less on simple improvements to the workings of the bureaucratic network of services and organisations.
One specific sector of EURES deserves a special mention, which is the area dedicated to cross-border cooperation in the field of employment and labour mobility, and which clearly generates a higher level of response: the cross-border EURES. Today, there are already twenty specific structures in this field, but a great deal remains to be done. I would remind you, in particular, of the case of my country’s border with Spain, which is largely ‘bare’, and I am also thinking of the new challenges and opportunities that the forthcoming enlargement will bring to this field. As a result of the considerable potential that these EURES cross-border structures offer in terms of local development, decentralised social dialogue and specific development of cross-border mobility, being able to work in another country without changing residence is clearly another priority for the future.
If we look at the 1998-1999 period, which the Commission’s report covers, we see positive data that we have highlighted. The report also contains some negative aspects to bear in mind, which we must correct straightaway. These include the considerable lack of public awareness, to which I have already referred, the low take-up in relative terms by employers’ organisations, the very high national imbalance in the participation of the various Member States, a fact which is disturbing and unacceptable, some shortcomings that have been noticed with regard to the web site, specifically in terms of its multilingual nature, which serves to provide an equal basis for all European citizens, and the absence of any mention of the outermost regions. We therefore also request that particular attention be paid in future to these regions’ specific problems in this field.
In our opinion, the Commission’s report itself contains some shortcomings, which we have highlighted. These are the absence of any diagnosis and a lack of assessment of the crux of the matter, in terms both of the development of the service itself and of the true state of labour mobility in the Union and the European Economic Area. The future reports by EURES will be much more useful and will make much more political sense if they present their critical vision of the successes and failures that have been notched up, if they include information which is more relevant, both in terms of statistics and of quality, if they better enable us to make a more accurate assessment of the definition of priorities of future goals and targets and if they also enable us to undertake a proper parliamentary assessment of the reasons underpinning the choices that are made.
This revamping of the future biennial reports from EURES and their content is, as a matter of fact, specifically called for in the conclusions of the last Spring Summit, in Stockholm, particularly those that were adopted following the Commission’s communication to the Council entitled ‘New European Labour Markets, Open to All, with Access for All’, which we are closely watching, which we welcome and which we warmly recommend should be followed up in this context.
We also propose a programme geared towards enlargement, a programme of preparatory action, which we would like to be accessible and appropriate. Furthermore, once a new legal basis for the organisation of EURES is announced, probably in 2002, Parliament will only need to say one simple thing, and that is: Parliament wishes to participate in this redefinition."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples