Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-200"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020410.6.3-200"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, to our Committee on Employment and Social Affairs – less so, though, to our highly-committed rapporteur, Mr Fatuzzo, who was sent to Parliament by the Italian Pensioners' Party – I would like to say that less would have been more. That, though, is the fault of – among other things – the over 200 amendments that our rapporteur had to deal with, the final result of which is the interminable resolution containing the relevant and the irrelevant along with, unfortunately, several contradictions and repetitions.
Despite that, this report is important because we indeed do not want to be left out of the European dialogue on safe pensions, not least because of the effects that unsustainable pension schemes could have on the value of the euro, quite apart from the pensioners' standard of living. If the euro is weak, we all suffer from it. Time means that I must, unfortunately, limit myself to a few fundamental principles. One is that, even if the decision-makers at national level retain responsibility for pension systems, it is still for the EU to call on them to introduce in due time reforms to secure the long-term sustainability of their systems, in order to guarantee pensions that are adequate and safe.
It is for that reason that one should also welcome the Commission's effort to monitor and promote these processes of reform through more in-depth cooperation between the Member States and on the basis of an open method of coordination. We can agree to the three guidelines on safe and sustainable pensions, as endorsed at Gothenburg. We may therefore expect the Member States to help to bring about a consensus capable of sustaining them in the solution of their common problems. We know that reforms of the pension systems have been introduced too hesitantly in various Member States, because they shrink from politically unpopular decisions. We therefore hope that the non-binding method of open coordination can contribute to the setting of common objectives and to speedily turning these into national policies.
As a woman – and, having been the youngest Member by far in 1965, I have since, unfortunately, become the oldest female in this House – I of course welcome the call, in the communication from the Commission, for pension systems to be examined with a view to their modernisation, with priority being given to the removal from all three pillars of all existing discrimination on the grounds of gender. That should have been done long ago in view of the directives from the 1970s on the equal treatment of women and men, which are still current. The Member States must of course ensure that women, and also house-husbands, who are for family reasons not represented in the labour market, as well as spouses who help out in family businesses, get opportunities to accrue individual pension entitlements. I would like to make particular reference to the spouses helping in businesses; there is a report on them by me dating back to 1995, and the Commission has still not yet responded to it.
Mr President, if you would allow me, as the oldest woman in this House, to say something further, it will be to those who have today resisted the idea that we, in view of our longer life expectancy should, of course, be able voluntarily to work for longer. I would like to add to that that they should perhaps take me as an example of how work and commitment are excellent ways of preventing premature ageing."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples