Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-10-Speech-1-121"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020610.6.1-121"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, my congratulations to Mrs Figueiredo and to the Committees on Culture and Women's Rights for their contributions to the final text of the report. The debate has clearly illustrated how important it is for us to work together on all three basic policies, economic policy, employment policy and social policy, that is, how important this isosceles triangle is if we are to have balanced results in all the Member States and in the European Union as a whole. Two important political points were also raised during the debate. Can and should the European Union get involved by coordinating or proposing policies on exclusion and poverty?
Of course, two or three Members have already touched on how we define poverty and exclusion today and of course there is a huge difference compared with developing world poverty. In Europe we are talking about relative poverty but, still, we should not forget that over 65 million people in Europe are dangerously close to the poverty line, nor should we overlook the wider issue of exclusion defined by new demands in the information society.
So, having agreed on the definition and the complicated issue of indicators, we come to the next question: should the European Union act? I think it is clearer now than at any time in the past, both from the conclusions to come out of Nice and the conclusions to come out of Barcelona, that a social policy dimension is needed in European policies and that the impact of European economic policies in the social area needs to be evaluated. That is why this is the first time, and I think this is worth stressing, that we have had a plan and any attempt to work together at European level on the issues of poverty and exclusion.
The second question is: can the European Union act – under the Treaties and by dividing responsibilities at European and national level? I think that we need to be clear and tread carefully here. Of course there is the question of subsidiarity. Of course social policy is becoming more and more decentralised and is being exercised at local, regional and government level in all the Member States. But I am certain that, by applying the method of open coordination, which does not impose legal frameworks, we have already reaped important initial results. Countries which have never had national action plans are now presenting organised national action plans. Valuable experience from countries which have already applied programmes is being passed to all the other countries. We are working together on the important issue of indicators and we are also working together on the important issue of how to apply these plans. I think that your report has a specific contribution to make and there are a number of points, the most important points, on which I completely agree and it is these points, I think, that should be discussed at the round table scheduled for October, during the Danish Presidency.
So it is important for the public debate on poverty to be an open debate involving more people, involving the people concerned, not just parliaments and social partners. Ex-post evaluation of each programme also plays an important part. Quantitative targets at national level are vital, distinguishing responsibilities for national action plans at national, regional and local level is very important and, of course, the budget and linking public funds to proposed policies and measures also plays a very important part.
During the Danish Presidency, we shall be evaluating national action plans on poverty to date and discussing preparations for future plans, as I said, at the round table in October. These are the issues we need to focus on, in order to ensure that the second generation of national action plans is far more effective. Finally, given that the Commission has been called on to act in the wake of this report, I should perhaps remind you that, since the Commission presented its communication to Parliament last October, the common position on social employment has been approved in Laeken and the programme on social exclusion, a very specific programme on which we worked together with Parliament and which gives the Member States tools to develop action plans on social exclusion, has also been approved.
It is, I think, important to remember that we have extended the procedure to all the candidate countries and we are in the process of signing action plans on exclusion with all the candidate countries so that, once they have joined, they can integrate fully into current procedures. Of course, we must not forget the very important work carried out – and which will continue during the second half of the year – on the subject of indicators, following approval of the initial 18 indicators at the Laeken Summit last December.
I should like to refer once more to the repeated discussions with your committee on the importance of social indicators to the policies of the European Union as a whole and how social indicators play a very important part at the spring Council, helping to shape final economic decisions in every country."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples