Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-16-Speech-3-100-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110216.5.3-100-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I would like to thank Members for this very substantial, inspirational and stimulating discussion. I would like to answer all the major points that have been raised as questions or comments and observations concerning the annual growth survey, the Economic Semester and Europe 2020 in general.
We have launched the microfinance facility. I am grateful to Parliament and the Council for the final consensus that made this possible last year. Just last week I was present in the Netherlands at the launch of the first EU-supported microfinance facility and there are more in the pipeline in order to support potential entrepreneurs, perhaps after the experience of being unemployed: women coming back to the labour market after childbirth or people who have already been working and want to seek a new form of enterprise beyond 50, or even 60.
When we discuss employment policies – and a good example of this was a couple of weeks ago when the EPSCO Council was hosted by the Hungarian Presidency in Gödöllő – we focus on how to generate job-rich goals, but also on the groups in most difficulty. In this case I must mention in particular young people.
Youth unemployment is very dramatic in some Member States. Again we have to be aware of diversity. Luckily, there are some Member States where youth unemployment is low, but the European average is too high. In some Member States, like Spain and the Baltics, it is at a tragic level. The governments have been alerted and a complex set of policies, from education to employment services and other types of measures, is required. But youth is not the only problem group. It is true that we have to do more with regard to the employment of older workers. That is why we designated 2012 the European Year for Active Ageing.
On the institutional questions concerning the Employment Guidelines – which I believe continue to be our focus and provide guidance and substance – there is a clear role for the European Parliament under Article 148 of the Treaty. The Employment Guidelines are to be renewed. This is confirmation that we want them to continue until 2014; they should neither be subject to major changes nor overruled by annual growth surveys. The guidelines provide long-term orientation, while the growth survey is an annual exercise that concerns its substance. But it is obviously true that the NRP exercise is crucial and that the Commission is pursuing it very seriously in the context of Europe 2020. Parliament will be involved in the discussions in various ways. I should refer here to the multiannual financial framework negotiations. The EU budget also has to reflect 2020 priorities and we will keep Parliament informed about the preparation of the national reform programme as the country-specific recommendations develop.
It is clear that there is concern at this early stage about the future of Europe 2020. In a way, a spectre is haunting Europe 2020: that of the Lisbon Strategy. I have had many opportunities in this House to discuss why we believe there is a much better chance, through a more focused system of targets and also a more focused system of reporting and implementation, of success with Europe 2020.
Only the Commission can ensure that there is consistency between these initiatives. We have a number of balls in the air and we have to make sure that none of them falls while conducting economic policies: Europe 2020, economic governance, the single market and cohesion policy. None of them must be damaged in this exercise. All of them need to be pursued in a very robust way, ensuring that all 27 Member States are involved. The Commission is obviously against the concept of a two-speed Europe. We have to ensure that the divided recovery which we are experiencing does not turn into political divisions in the coming period.
The most important thing is that we get the picture right, both about the documents and also about the economic situation in the European Union. The inconvenient truth is that Europe is experiencing a recovery. Last year we already had economic growth in the European Union – but not in every Member State – and that is where the second part of the inconvenient truth comes. We are experiencing a very fragile and divided recovery. The Commission has looked at this situation very thoroughly and developed policies accordingly.
We need to maintain and strengthen the recovery, and we have to address the current division. This will not, however, be possible without addressing the weaknesses that have been exposed by the crisis in economic and monetary union, which we will do by developing further the architecture of economic and monetary governance in the European Union. That is where the complications begin and where it may be true that the priorities are not always immediately recognised by everyone.
For us, economic growth is the priority and all other policies in this phase serve this. We need to strengthen growth and make it more robust, but in order to do this we need a greater level of financial stability, and for that we also need fiscal consolidation. It is inevitable that, in the coming years, fiscal consolidation will remain on the agenda in the interests of stabilisation and of being consistent with the kinds of cyclical intervention which the Member States implemented against the recession in previous years.
We need a smart consolidation which does not undermine demand in the economy and which preserves the integrity of the EU economy as a whole. This lesson has to be learned. This must begin by stabilising the euro. I could obviously use stronger expressions here, but let us just stick to this one. We need to stabilise the euro and economic and monetary union. The lesson we share is that, in order to do that, we need to strengthen the economic leg of this Union and the economic leg of policy coordination at European level.
Let me just ask a question and leave it as a question on this. The question is whether the strengthening of the economic leg of governance can succeed without a collective effort on wages, on coordinating wage developments in the European Union. When I say that, and when we include suggestions in this area in the annual growth survey, it does not mean that we would question the importance of the social dialogue – quite the contrary. We have praised countries with a tradition and culture of strong social partnership. We recognise that they suffered less from the crisis and, in particular, suffered fewer losses in terms of human resources. Unemployment remained lower in these countries. We advocate the strengthening of social dialogue in other Member States which have suffered more and which responded to the crisis with less flexibility than countries like Germany, the Netherlands or Austria.
We have also increased the level of social dialogue at European level. We recently held macroeconomic dialogue with the social partners and we will have a new tripartite social forum in March in order to enhance coordination and dialogue with the social partners.
I would like to reject very categorically the notion that the Commission is doing business as usual. In the last year the Commission has introduced a number of qualitatively new initiatives. We are pursuing a robust agenda for Financial Regulation. Commissioner Barnier’s work should not be underestimated.
As part of Europe 2020, we outlined a new concept for industrial policy at European level which does much more for competitiveness and the sustainability of jobs in the European Union. We are pursuing a number of innovative approaches to boost investment and to find funding for it. A group of Commissioners has been working to develop innovative financial instruments. The first example of this is going to be an outline for supporting developing energy networks in Europe. This is absolutely necessary in order to develop the energy markets and the necessary infrastructure that is vital for it."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples