Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-13-Speech-4-279"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-04-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000413.10.4-279"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-04-13-Speech-4-2802
lpv:speaker	lp:Ilda Figueiredo2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries and the Gulf (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2002-03-05)3
lpv:translated text	". We voted against this report because we consider that in content it differs little from the Commission’s proposal, which aims to put social security totally in the hands of the financial markets, thus weakening or even replacing state pension schemes by stock market speculation. This makes it quite clear what the “modernisation of social protection” agreed at the Lisbon Summit is meant to be. As we stated in the amendments we tabled, creating a single market for supplementary pension funds is not an adequate response to future demographic problems. What we need are expansionist economic policies which help to create permanent jobs, thus expanding the pool of contributors to the state pension fund. The state social security system, which is financed on a solid footing independent of commercial interests and financial profitability, and which is based on a spirit of solidarity between generations, is in a position to guarantee the right to a dignified retirement and to security in old age for workers who have paid contributions to state pension schemes."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph