Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-20-Speech-3-009"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070620.2.3-009"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, to say that this is a difficult issue is an understatement. We have been working on nine articles for nearly two years. European agreements for supplementary pensions are needed for three reasons.
After two years of nearly constant consultation, the time has come for this House to nail its colours to the mast. I should like to add that the signals that I have picked up, not least from the forthcoming Portuguese Presidency and from my own Member State the Netherlands, are definitely positive, because this report offers many things to go on at second reading.
If we want to achieve the Lisbon objectives, we can only do this on the basis of specific topics of this kind. We did not manage to finish it today. We will negotiate with the Council, and I as rapporteur and we as Parliament will try to continue to adopt the most constructive stance possible in order to settle this matter, for that is what is really needed.
First of all, legal pensions, the first pillar, are increasingly coming under pressure due to the number of young people falling and the number of old people rising. This is why sound agreements need to be in place for second-pillar pensions. At present, one in ten employees in Europe has a supplementary pension. In Great Britain and Germany, this percentage is well above the 50% mark and in Denmark, Sweden or the Netherlands, even 90% of the employees have signed up to a supplementary pension scheme. This is therefore sufficient cause to encourage Member States and social partners to face up to their responsibility and to start putting an effective scheme in place that provides for old age.
Secondly, nearly every day, I come across people who have changed jobs and who are penalised for this, because they exercise their right to freedom of mobility. They have built up a pension, the premiums have been paid, but if the capital does not change, then it is of no use to them when they retire. This directive intends to address this problem.
Thirdly, within the framework of the Lisbon Agenda, we preach that worker mobility should be further promoted. Everybody would like to see this principle applied, but we have problems implementing it. My goal was, and still is, to table legislation that brings something, not least for employees, that is realistic for the Member States and social partners and also offers sufficient scope to managers of supplementary pension schemes to adapt to it. Legislation that only contains exceptions or an act that does not apply to all Member States and does not enter into force until 2018 is of no use. We have to tackle the problems of the future now.
I should like to extend warm thanks, particularly to Mr Ettl and Mr Cocilovo, to the other shadow rapporteurs for social affairs, to Mrs Lulling for the advice, but also to the rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs of previous pension reports, Mr Karas and Mrs van den Burg. Together, we stand by a result and also take responsibility for this report by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.
We can – and I also have the Council Presidency in mind when I say this – make progress on this basis without encroaching on existing schemes. Moreover, this directive is about minimum standards. There is nothing stopping the social partners from offering more protection in an agreement.
I should now like to quickly outline the key points. With regard to acquisition, the conditions of acquisition which Parliament prescribes affect some schemes. Time is needed to adapt, and Amendment 22 provides for this additional time of five years.
With regard to dormant pension rights, as the current formula has been developed in cooperation with the German Presidency, we will soon be voting on a basic principle which the Member States will be able to flesh out as they see fit. Concerning the transfer, as it became obvious very quickly that this was a bridge too far, we did not pursue this option any further. In respect of information, workers are gaining easier access to the status of their pensions.
It may well be, therefore, that Member States need more time to adjust their schemes, which is precisely what this House is giving them. Member States, together with the social partners, are being given until 2013 to adapt their schemes in the areas of both acquisition and the fair adjustment of dormant pension rights."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples