Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-11-Speech-2-288"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030311.11.2-288"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, politics makes a qualitative difference when it is able to counter negative trends and uncertainties with positive measures, and surely no such difference is being made through the way in which the second pillar of the pension system is being structured, even when, as here, we are concerned with a financial services directive. In spite of his best efforts, the rapporteur has not succeeded in improving the common position, which really does not add anything in terms of quality. Devising a framework within which products are offered that, from today’s point of view, may seriously impair living standards in old age has nothing to do with a sense of political responsibility. What is really needed here are regulations to reduce people’s uncertainties at precisely the present time. In recent years, British pension funds alone have lost 35 million pounds, and rather more still in the years before that, so they too have not exactly excelled. Nor have matters gone significantly better for the other Member States. At a period such as this, people ought not, where the issue of pensions is concerned, to be led to expect quality when it is not present.
Quality regulation of the European market is certainly not brought about by a minimal duty to provide information, together with what is no more than discretionary wording enabling the Member States to define quality for a restricted market with reference to biometric risks. If – as you yourself always do, Commissioner – we want to see such quality or an increase in quality, then we can, at this stage, really make no better start than by agreeing to the proposal by the Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left to reject the common position. That alone would signify ‘back to square one’ and, for us, new opportunities of obtaining an improved directive."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples