Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-11-Speech-3-104"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-05-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050511.13.3-104"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-05-11-Speech-3-1052
lpv:speaker	lp:Marie-Noëlle Lienemann2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Parti socialiste (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-20--2006-12-31)3
lpv:translated text	". I voted for Amendment 37 calling for the rejection of this draft directive, which retains the negative points of the previous legislation such as the opt-out and begins the process of dismantling the working time rules. The rapporteur, Mr Cercas, however, is attempting to demonstrate the European Parliament’s intention to secure abandonment of the opt-out, a real poison for the future of European social law, within three years. I think we need to support him in this aim. Nevertheless, I cannot accept that, in return, he is allowing the 48-hour maximum to be calculated over a 12-month period and is allowing working time to be calculated and annualised as employers have demanded, as well as reducing the extent to which time on call is taken into account. This compromise is not satisfactory and is in no way a step forward as we have the right to expect in the European Union. It even includes some backward steps. We are in the early stages of the legislative procedure, and a vote in favour of the Cercas report is nothing more than support for the approach taken towards abandoning the opt-out. Nonetheless, at the end of the codecision stage, I will not approve a working text based on 48 hours."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph