Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-06-Speech-2-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050906.6.2-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the controversy sparked off by this directive is disproportionate and, at the same time, undoubtedly reveals two different approaches to the policy that the EU must conduct on protecting workers’ rights. I do not believe, Mr Mann, that protecting workers’ health puts jobs at risk.
As Mr Őry pointed out, this proposal for a directive is simply the fourth part of a set of laws on which Parliament and the Council have already expressed opinions and which is aimed, from a health and safety perspective, at protecting workers against the risks connected with exposure to physical agents. As you know, we have already adopted provisions relating to vibrations, noise and electromagnetic fields. In the present case, we are led to draw a distinction between radiation from artificial sources and that from natural sources. At the same time, however, there is an element of obscurity – if you will excuse the terminology – in your speeches and reasoning concerning health and, in particular, public health policies: you draw no distinction between the risk to which someone – in this instance, a worker – is exposed because of natural rays and that to which he or she is exposed because of artificial radiation.
Even if the provisions proposed in the common position do in fact take account of the difference between standing in front of a machine and being exposed to solar radiation due to outdoor work, we need specific policies for each eventuality, even if we do consider that, in the end, what has been implemented by the Community under Article 137 of the Single Act should be enough. In other words, we should take steps to ensure that health and safety measures are laid down for the purpose of protecting all EU workers in their work places. Not to do so would be to give up, and that is something we cannot do. There is a new risk. There is data that cannot be ignored from both the World Health Organisation and our national health bodies, showing that the number of cancers linked to exposure to the sun is on the increase. It is increasing, in particular, in occupations involving exposure to the sun, something that cannot be explained merely in terms, for example, of the variables of holidays and other free time. There is exposure to the sun in the construction, civil engineering and tourist industries. Police in charge of security are also very often out of doors. A much longer list of the occupations concerned could be drawn up.
We therefore have a responsibility, and the proposal being made is reasonable inasmuch as it takes account of companies’ need to be able to meet this type of obligation at low cost. It is a question of information, training, assessment and prevention. It is, in actual fact, a question of laying down obligations for employers, because the fact is, workers are dependent upon their employers. Some people maintain that the proposal is too precise and that the Community and the European Union will make themselves look ridiculous. My own observation is that, in the economic field, legislation can never be too precise. When it comes to financial regulations, the internal market or the banking sphere, we are adept at voting in favour of precise standards. The point is, we need, I think, also to be capable of being precise when it comes to people’s health.
We do not agree with the notion whereby European standards and rules have to be compulsory in the economic field but whereby subsidiarity and opt-out clauses need systematically to be invoked when it comes to social rights and to the protection of workers’ health. That is why we do not want the content of this legislation to be distorted and why, where prevention and the provision of information are concerned, we want all EU workers to be offered standards such as will help combat the development of skin cancer."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples