Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-11-Speech-2-118"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030311.6.2-118"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, five months ago I presented the results of the evaluation of the European Employment Strategy to Parliament and Parliament passed a resolution approving the core results of this evaluation and the basic guidelines.
Clearly, therefore, we are all under a great deal of pressure this year if we are to keep to this timetable, but may I remind you that we shall not be starting the debate in April from square one. The debate on the reform of the Employment Strategy started back in July last year. A very specific debate was held in Parliament, followed in January by the recent communication and I think that, if Parliament and the Commission work closely together, we should be able to overcome timetabling problems and coordinate economic policy and employment policy this year. This is very important if we are to avoid overlaps and ensure that one procedure does not take precedence over the other.
The presentation of the results was followed by an extended debate between all the European institutions. Broad consultations were also held with the social partners, so that the Commission could present the results of the debate together with specific proposals for future priorities and improved management of the Employment Strategy. As a result, the Commission presented a document in January containing a new approach to the Employment Strategy.
Basically, the new approach focuses mainly on implementing the Lisbon objectives. As Thomas Mann said, the situation is different, the economic situation is not auspicious, and this is having a significant impact on unemployment, with certain groups of the populace being harder hit than others. Thus, despite the positive evaluation of the results of the Employment Strategy, with reforms in all the Member States and ten million new jobs created between 1997 and 2001; despite the positive approach, there can be no doubt that we need to activate more policies and speed up the reforms.
In order to be able to focus more on Lisbon, we have set three basic objectives: full employment, labour standards and productivity and a cohesive labour market. I should like to emphasise that the gender dimension has been mainstreamed in all three objectives and in our priorities and specific reference is made to the particular conditions faced by women in the labour market.
Having agreed on the three basic objectives, we then come to the substance of the guidelines. Both Parliament and the Council called for fewer, simpler guidelines focusing more clearly on results. Our objective, therefore, is to cut the number of guidelines, if possible by half, and to articulate them around highly specific priorities. We have selected eleven priorities; the new priorities and those that have come up against the greatest resistance, in the sense that some countries accept them while others do not, are undeclared work and immigration. So we have three basic objectives and eleven basic priorities around which the guidelines on employment are structured.
We believe, in the light of experience over recent years, that the quantitative approach plays a very important part. In other words, the guidelines need to include quantitative targets, if policy is to be quantifiable, and governments need to be judged on the basis of specific targets. Our proposal therefore includes specific sectors which can be used as a basis for discussion and in which Member States can agree on European or specific national targets.
Another important point is partnership. The method of administering the procedure for the Employment Strategy does, of course, vary from one country to another. Each country takes a different approach, depending on its culture and on how the social partnership and local authorities are organised. However, the evaluation identifies certain points which are common to every country. The social partners need an enhanced role, the procedure needs to be advertised in order to increase awareness among as many citizens and agencies as possible and, of course, in the European and national parliaments, the territorial dimension of the strategy needs to be developed in the form of regional and local employment plans, civil society needs to be galvanised into action and, finally, parliamentary bodies need to be more involved in the procedure.
This last point brings me to timetabling. I should like to say from the outset that I understand perfectly Parliament’s concerns this year, as far as approval of the guidelines is concerned, because this year is the first time we shall be implementing enhanced coordination of economic policy cycles and employment policy cycles.
In order to implement this coordination, which has been called for on numerous occasions, including in Parliament, we need four different stages. The first stage is to decide on the general guidelines for the strategy on employment and the broad economic policy guidelines at the spring Council. The second is to submit the guidelines as quickly as possible after that, as a package. This means that, once we have the spring Council’s guidelines, the Commission will present a package of guidelines on both economic policy and employment. The third is to approve the guidelines; this needs to be done as quickly as possible, if possible at the June Council. The fourth, once these guidelines have been approved, is to draw up national action plans and the joint report on employment by the autumn."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples