Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-05-04-Speech-1-103"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-05-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Equal treatment between men and women engaged in a self-employed capacity - Pregnant workers (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"cs"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090504.16.1-103"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-05-04-Speech-1-1042
lpv:speaker	lp:Vladimír Špidla2
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to thank you for a discussion that has tackled the proposal from many different perspectives. I think it is unnecessary to mention all of the proposals. A great majority of the justifications were quite clear, as I pointed out in my opening speech. Nevertheless, I think there were two proposals which cropped up repeatedly from various sides and which were discussed from a number of different perspectives. The first was the issue of paternity leave. I would like to state clearly that, even though I am in favour of paternity leave, I am still convinced that a directive that is designed to protect the health of mothers is not a suitable instrument for the introduction of this particular principle. In my opening speech I stated that the social partners had reached an agreement over parental leave, and it would be logical to include the possibility of paternity leave in this agreement. So there are tools other than the directive, in my view. The other issue to be mentioned was Amendment 14, namely the introduction of mandatory insurance. In this respect, I would like to add that, even though I understand the argument, I still think it is not appropriate to take such a radical step, primarily because it would seriously threaten the possibility of reaching a compromise. On the other hand, I would like to stress that the proposals we have tabled mark a major step forward, because in some countries there is no opportunity to join such a system at present, not even on request. This means that a new obligation will now be introduced. In my view, this is a typical example of upward harmonisation."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph