Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-15-Speech-1-071"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081215.14.1-071"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I fully understand the many fears that have been expressed in relation to this complex and important issue. The key question is whether Parliament will stick to the view it adopted in 2005 at the first reading and which has been reiterated in the rapporteur’s proposal, or whether Parliament is thinking of changing its position in reaction to the common viewpoint adopted by the Council in September of last year.
I would like to give a brief summary of several points which I think are relevant in terms of the discussion on working time. First, I firmly believe that the reworking of this directive is an important and urgent task. Public services across Europe are asking us to clarify the legal situation concerning on-call time. This was a key factor in favour of revising the directive. The continuing uncertainty of the past few years has made a very unwelcome impact on the organisation of hospitals, emergency services and institutional care as well as on the support services for people with health problems. All of us have been asked to do something about this issue. Similar requests have been made to us by central and local government authorities, organisations, individual employees, private citizens and the European Parliament.
Secondly, this is a very significant issue which divides the Council and Parliament, particularly over the future of the opt-out. I am very familiar with the view which Parliament took over this question at the first reading. I would like to point out that the Commission in 2005 made some fundamental changes to its draft legislation and proposed ending the opt-out. This was done in response to the views of Parliament in the first reading and it has sought to defend this position during four years of heated debate with the Council.
I think, however, that we must look at the realities of the situation. In 2003 the opt-out was used by only four Member States, but today it is being used by fifteen Member States. And many more Member States wish to retain the option of using it in the future. The factors that led to the Council’s decision are clear. The opt-out is now established in the current directive and if Parliament and the Council cannot agree to its removal it will remain in force without limitations, in accordance with the current wording.
My primary interest in relation to the reworking of the directive is therefore to ensure that the large number of workers throughout Europe who are exercising the opt-out enjoy proper employment protection. For this reason, I consider it important to focus on the actual terms and conditions which ensure freedom of choice for the workers who decide to use the opt-out, while ensuring the safety and health protection of workers using the opt-out as well as an absolute limit on the average number of hours worked. The common approach also encompasses this.
The common approach also includes specific well-formulated provisions for the future revision of the opt-out. Many of the Member States that have recently introduced the opt-out did so mainly for reasons relating to on-call time. These Member States will perhaps be able to reassess the use of the opt-out once they have understood the effects of all the changes we are making in the area of on-call time.
I would like to end by mentioning that I am aware of the differences between the views of Parliament and the Council when it comes to working time. It will not be easy to bring about an agreement between Parliament and the Council and we do not have much time left in the current functional period. In my view, however, it is a task of fundamental importance.
I think that the citizens of Europe will find it hard to understand why European institutions that have managed to cooperate in the interests of solving the problems of the financial crisis were not able to set out clear, balanced rules for working time. We should not forget that it took four years for the Council to reach a common position. I would also like to draw your attention to the connections with the directive on agency workers, which was passed in October at the second reading.
It is easy to imagine how difficult it will be to secure the agreement of the Council if major amendments are made to the common position. I feel that at this moment it is important to carefully consider the balance between questions of content and potential tactics, so that it will be possible after today’s debate to move closer to finding a basis for agreement on working time. The Commission is willing to continue acting as an ‘honest broker’ over this matter in the legislative process. I wish Parliament success in its debate and in its decisions over this highly important issue."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples