Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-18-Speech-1-046"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101018.13.1-046"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, this directive was always intended, quite rightly, to provide minimum standards to protect pregnant workers and women who are breastfeeding. However, I find that some of the amendments from the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs go too far.
They do not take into account the different traditions in different Member States. Some countries have maternity leave, some have paternity leave as well, and some have parental leave. They are paid in totally different ways and at different rates – some from the social security systems, some from businesses and some are a mixture. We must not ruin some very good systems.
My amendments try to address the difficulty of achieving something that will suit all Member States. Bringing in full pay would, in my opinion, stop a lot of young people – or young women in particular – being employed. I am pleased that the second impact assessment was at least more detailed than the first. As you know, it said that it would cost the ten Member States over EUR 7 billion a year if full pay was included. It did not even look at the other 17 Member States, and I assume the cost of bringing in full pay for them would also be problematic.
As far as compulsory leave is concerned, I have always believed that it is for the mother herself to decide what time to take off and when to take it off. In the 1960s and 70s, we fought for equal rights for women – not for them to be dictated to – and we seem to be going backwards instead of forwards."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples