Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-11-Speech-2-443-500"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-09-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120911.32.2-443-500"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-09-11-Speech-2-444-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Kent Johansson2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; FEMM (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; ALDE (2012-01-27--2014-06-30)3 member; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Centerpartiet (2011-10-21--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2012-04-18--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2012-04-24--2013-06-30)3 substitute; AGRI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"I would like to use this explanation of vote to explain why it is necessary for the Commission to look into this matter further. I strongly uphold the free movement of persons on the EU’s internal market as a fundamental right for all EU citizens, but I see a need to examine the relationship between different legislative instruments in order for it to work in the best way possible. After all, the Free Movement Directive grants EU citizens the right to reside in another EU Member State for a period longer than three months without working if the person has sufficient resources to not be considered a burden on the country’s social assistance system and has sickness insurance. In several EU Member States, however, a person who is not working nevertheless has the right to various social security benefits. The Commission’s proposal can be read in such a way that a person who is not working and who has been granted a social security benefit (which is not linked to gainful employment) can be considered to have resources so that he/she is not considered to constitute a burden on the Member State’s social assistance system and thus meet the requirements for the right of residence. In practice, this means that a person is first examined to see if he/she has the right to social security benefits (regulation on the coordination of social security systems) and then whether he/she has the right to residence (directive on the free movement of persons). From a purely logical point of view, it should be the other way around and the right to residence should be examined before granting social security benefits."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph