Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-06-Speech-1-281"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100906.20.1-281"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, the report that I am presenting is the result of a compromise between groups with very different viewpoints on employment policy and unemployment protection. I would therefore like to thank the shadow rapporteurs, as well as the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Budgets, for the cooperativeness they have shown towards reaching an agreement that can be useful to the victims of collective redundancies in the European Union.
This agreement is based on two premises: the first is that the social effects of the crisis will continue to be felt, even in the event of an economic recovery, which is far from guaranteed. Collective redundancies are therefore not a thing of the past and, unfortunately, they will continue to have an impact on the social lives of our countries. For this reason, the first choice is simple: do we or do we not wish to extend until 2020 the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, which is the only instrument that Europe devotes to people affected by collective redundancy? This report’s answer is clear: yes, we want to send a strong message to the unemployed; yes, we think that they must be supported through programmes for reskilling and reintegration into employment; and yes, we think they deserve another chance and that we, the politicians in charge, owe them that.
The second premise is that there were many failings in the way that this fund functioned when it started out, but the changes introduced to its regulation have significantly increased the number of applications to make use of it. It is still too early to go ahead with an evaluation, but we can indicate and identify the main problem. From the time of the collective redundancy, it takes between 12 and 17 months for the money to arrive in the countries, and in some cases much more. We have a fund to respond to urgent social needs and it moves at a snail’s pace. It is the social consequences that concern me: because of this slowness, many workers end up not benefiting from the fund; moreover, it discourages the preparation of applications in the regions and countries with the greatest need.
Governments then do not implement the applications until they have been approved in Brussels, because that would force them to take the initiative with the national component of the financing at a time of budgetary austerity. That is why the report proposes a series of short-term measures to cut the delay by 50% and why it is being proposed to make the fund permanent from 2013.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, some of the Member States that have been benefiting most from the fund are resisting its simplification: they fear that speeding it up will end up requiring more and more money. Let us be frank: this risk exists, whether the fund is slow or fast. The risk of a long period of mediocre growth exists because it depends on what impact austerity policies will have on the recovery of our economies.
However, we are talking about something else today: Europe’s attitude towards collective redundancies and whether we are sacrificing their victims at the altar of budgetary restrictions or are at least able to give these people at least as much attention as we gave to the financial system, which our taxes saved.
This report’s decision is born from ethics, from how we see our fellow human beings and from how we see Europe. I want a Europe that is unequivocally social."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples