Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-11-Speech-4-017"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040311.2.4-017"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, I too endorse the words of sympathy addressed to the Spanish population and, above all, to the relatives of the victims. I think that this Parliament cannot condemn such acts of violence enough.
This year’s annual update of the coordination regulation is a little unusual, for we are not only discussing technical changes, but also attempting to formulate a coherent position for non-exportable benefits. I am pleased to concur with the words of Mrs Hermange, who notes that the Court of Justice has always stressed that the exceptions to the principle of non-exportability must be interpreted to the letter. In other words, these pertain much more to measures of social security that are payable to all citizens within the territory. The Commission too is in favour of a strict interpretation, and that is why I support the proposal that is now before us in Annex IIA.
I should, nevertheless, like to make two crucial observations. First of all, an overall agreement is to be reached shortly about the modernisation of the coordination regulation, including an agreement about non-exportable benefits. Word has already reached me that serious attempts are being made in the Council to extend the list of non-exportable benefits considerably, thus undermining the coordination regulation. By approving these annexes today, we have to send a message to the Council that Parliament will not tolerate this.
Secondly, it is interesting if a system is constructed logically, but we should also realise that changes affect real people. Certainly if they concern regulations that have been laid down in order to guarantee people a minimum income, we have to consider very carefully what impact changes have on a country’s citizens, and particularly if there is no analogous regulation in place in other countries. I believe therefore, Commissioner, that it is appalling to have to conclude that, yet again, no such verification has taken place. For years, this Parliament has asked for the marginal effect to be verified, and what is happening now demonstrates what a fair question this is. By adding the Dutch Extra Allowance Act, which was included on the list with good reason in my opinion, nearly 200 Belgian border workers will be losing their extra allowance. Some of those will be compensated on the basis of the Belgian Social Security Act, but others will lose part of their income and that is why, Commissioner, I urge you to mount a thorough investigation into the effects on those involved, if need be via the EURES networks.
Furthermore, it is necessary for the Member States responsible, in this case Belgium and the Netherlands, to agree on transitional periods and compensation measures, possibly by means of a bilateral agreement. The amendment that is being tabled in the plenary meeting today must be supported come what may. Along with my Belgian and Dutch fellow MEPs, I intend to write to the ministers responsible in order to find solutions for the people who risk losing part of their income and, consequently, falling below the poverty line."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples