Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-27-Speech-3-107"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020227.6.3-107"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to single out one aspect of the summit, namely employment, since the socio-economic policy which we pursue has, after all, a considerable bearing on employment.
Firstly, I am of the opinion that the summit should consider whether the objectives laid down in Lisbon can be met. In my view, this is impossible at the sluggish pace which we are currently seeing in Europe. I have studied the figures relating to the development of employment and unemployment. Last year was disappointing, and we will therefore never be able to meet the target. This is partly due to the fact that there is no longer any pressure from the European Union to actually implement the national action plans for employment which Member States are required to submit every year.
During the initial period of the Luxembourg process, the bad reports which the Commission gave the different Member States were still headline news. News of such reports has now been relegated to token entries on the last pages of some newspapers. This means, therefore, that the pressure to utilise the open coordination method is slowly being reduced. The summit should therefore consider what can be done to increase this pressure.
I would now like to mention two specific points. Firstly, the costs to employers of creating employment are far too high. If I look at the difference between the costs and what employees are eventually left with, then non-management staff, for example, retain on average 45% of the costs of employing them, while management retain 35 or 36%. If nothing is done to curb these costs for employers, the level of redundancies will remain high.
Secondly, the difference between unemployment benefits and wages is too small. Many people remain unemployed and combine this situation with moonlighting, because wages are too low."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples