Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-12-Speech-3-015"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030212.3.3-015"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, and I should add, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about the Spring Summit, and Lisbon, about strategies for economic, social and environmental renewal. In fact, I have barely heard mention of those last two words. The question, therefore, is whether Lisbon is on the right track that is the question in the Commission notice and whether we, the EU, are still on the right track, and are travelling at the right speed.
As far as the right track is concerned, I think that the report is based on a number of presuppositions – in regard to which I should like to delve a little deeper than Mr van Velzen and a number of analyses that are incorrect. I think that what we are dealing with is not a new economy but a cyclical one, and we have to take account of this. I think that we are also over-emphasising the knowledge-based economy, as we also need jobs at the bottom of the labour market – but I do not hear anyone talking about this. We are overestimating the potential of liberalisation and underestimating the Member States’ capacity to implement directives and legislation. We are not seeking the causes of the failure to implement them.
Is the EU still on the right track, and travelling at the right speed? I think that Mr van Velzen puts it well, and several people have mentioned it. The answer is no. Let us look at employment: there are too few new jobs. With our twelve million, we can consider ourselves well off, but these jobs are not the result of our policies alone. The number of women, older people and people with disabilities in employment is too low. The path to better jobs is still long, and we have done far too little in the way of the modernisation of the organisation of work. I hope, therefore, that the review of the employment strategy that we are now going to work on and the improvement of the social agenda will bring about an adjustment in that field.
If we look at the environment, we see that nothing has come of the horizontal integration in this policy. I am saying it simply but in the strongest terms. I have also just said that little progress has been made in the transport sector, and likewise in energy policy, in agricultural policy and in the field of public health. Who is discussing energy tax reforms? And so on, and so on.
If we look at the general approach, too, talking of Kyoto or Johannesburg, we see very little progress. However, we need better indicators, et cetera. I have already said it: the policy is too one-sided with regard to knowledge and innovation. As an engineer, I am all for the intellectual elite, but we should also look at other developments. We need other jobs, too, and that means that we also have to think of the bottom end of the labour market, that we have to tackle the informal economy, and so on.
The streamlining of economic and social policy is very important, but that means that we have to draw conclusions both for the Stability and Growth Pact and for the orientation of the broad economic guidelines towards social and environmental policy. We must continue with Lisbon, but incorporating great adjustments, not only in the Member States, who have all kinds of things to implement, but also strategic adjustments and adjustments to its content. In my opinion, we need a thorough evaluation of what we are doing."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples