Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-204"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020410.6.3-204"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Fatuzzo for his report and to express my admiration for his enthusiasm and staying power on the subject of the reform of pensions systems.
I think the agreed joint report with its three basic lines of approach and eleven points which all the countries must use as a basis for reform contains two important victories: the first is that the economic and social dimensions sit side by side and the second is that it gives maximum European added value to national policies.
Monetary Union and the increasingly integrated economic policies of the Member States of the European Union undeniably give all policies a European dimension, even policies which were strictly national until just a few years ago. In December, both the ECOFIN and the Social Affairs Council agreed on joint objectives and working methods for pensions. The fact that both Councils – both ECOFIN and the Social Affairs and Employment Council – are taking an equally categorical and focused approach to the issue of pensions is an important political step. As we have said time and again in this Chamber, this is not an economic issue, it is a social issue with economic implications.
In today's report, Parliament has, I think, put an optimistic foot forward on the road to cooperation between the Council, the Commission and Parliament, a new, ambitious programme of cooperation on the subject of pensions. The Commission presented its report on pensions in June 2001. Let me reiterate what transpires from both the Commission report and the European Parliament report, because I think it is important. Pension systems cannot be reformed in a vacuum. This issue does not impinge on just one type of legislation. It impinges on a set of policies whose repercussions will be felt by the pension systems. I need only mention policies to resolve Europe's demographic problem. The demographic problem was initially aired at the Madrid conference on the ageing population, which discussed the twin problems of the rise in life expectancy and the European countries' inability to make up their populations.
A second important chapter is employment and I would remind you of the important steps taken by the European Council on specific objectives and on the involvement of older workers in the job market. There is an important point to be made here. We cannot simply focus on increasing age limits, justified as they are by the rise in life expectancy and economic problems. No, that is not enough. We also need to present and implement a set of policies to keep and motivate older workers to stay in the job market. It is extremely difficult for people over 50 to stay in or find work in numerous industries in the private sector. So we need investment and specific policies in the employment sector to train these people and to ensure that the education system and the training system commit to specific quotas for older people.
Policies on poverty and social exclusion also need to be mentioned here. Several Members defined the connection between policies on poverty and the reform of the pensions systems and the Commission is currently working on new indicators for pension adequacy in relation to data on poverty.
Ladies and gentlemen, the question of pensions is, of course, a question of national policy; in numerous countries it is a question of regional policy. The European Union has no desire – and it would, I think, be impossible – to intervene in national systems or issue guidelines as to which is the best system and which is the worst. However, it is clear, both for reasons of mobility – several members referred to numerous new problems with worker mobility in the European Union – and because there are common causes for the problem of viability, that there is a need for cooperation.
This need appears to be met by the method of open cooperation. This method is a new tool which we have tried in policies on employment and policies on poverty and exclusion and now we are really putting it to the test with pensions. Are there democratic lacunae? Indeed there are! Is there more room for cooperation with Parliament? Indeed there is!
I should like, if I may, to reiterate where exactly the European Parliament fits into the method of open cooperation on employment. Every year Parliament's presence is more keenly felt, greater account is taken of its proposals and it has a very important role in the application in question. The cooperation method on pensions has only just begun. In September, the Member States will submit their first reports. Parliament will be able to contribute to the Commission's joint report. And may I say I have no objection to sending all the reports to the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, so that we can really work together right from the start.
Finally, two issues with a European and a specific dimension. The first is the dimension of gender equality which, because of the
and European legislation, have to be mainstreamed in all reforms. The second, as has quite rightly been stressed, is that enlargement and the candidate countries must be included in any plans. The conference which you have organised in May with authorities from the candidate countries is a good starting point for cooperation, given that the candidate countries will have to take part in this joint exercise in two years' time."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples