Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-29-Speech-1-119"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Equality in access to and supply of goods and services2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040329.12.1-119"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-29-Speech-1-1202
lpv:speaker	lp:Angelika Niebler2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2002-03-08--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, warm thanks, first of all, to our rapporteur Mrs Prets; I think we all agree on the basic premise that the fight against discrimination on the grounds of gender deserves our wholehearted support. We should not, however, allow this concern to deflect our gaze from the problems that this directive engenders. In essence, it has to do with the insurance sector. The Commission, along with many Members of this House, takes the view that gender should no longer be taken into account when calculating insurance premiums, claiming that this is intrinsically discriminatory. A majority on the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market disagrees with this approach; the fact is that calculating risks is what insurance companies do, and where there are different levels of risk, these may be taken into account. To take one example, in private old age pensions insurance, insurers take account, in their calculations, of the tendency of women to live longer than men can expect to do. I do not see that as intrinsically discriminatory; it is one of the factors that may be taken into account when working out the contributions. Another example is to be found in motor insurance; according to the statistics, it so happens that women cause fewer accidents than do men, and so insurers charge women lower rates. I do not think that is discriminatory; that is the application of mathematics, which cannot simply be abrogated by legislation. The one exception I would make is in the case of maternity and pregnancy, where I do not believe there should be any difference between men and women when it comes to the costs. This is an area where both sexes, of course, share responsibility, and the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market has therefore decided that they must be treated equally in this respect. What leads me to oppose this directive is the fact that it stands for massive interference in people’s private affairs. I am opposed to the introduction of unisex tariffs, and I hope that the amendments that our group has resubmitted will be supported by a majority of the plenary tomorrow."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph