Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-13-Speech-2-331"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010213.15.2-331"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – I would like to thank and congratulate Mrs Jensen on her report. I very much appreciate the fact that most of the Members of Parliament have referred to the Lisbon conclusions. This is our main ambition in this proposal as well. We want to use this proposal which is based on Article 129 of the Treaty to support, deepen and develop the employment strategy and through that to achieve the goal of full employment of Lisbon.
Amendment No 10 for a new Article 3 is quite complex. I can agree to add to the existing text to emphasise the focus on the local employment dimension of the European employment strategy. However, I cannot accept the reservation of part of the appropriations for specific activities relating to local development as these will be covered by the general objectives of the programme. Similarly, I cannot accept the amendment to use this programme for local employment projects as this is covered by the other programmes such as the EQUAL Programme and those provided for under Article 6 of the European structural and social funds' regulation. So I can only accept Amendment No 10 in part.
I accept in spirit the proposed Amendments Nos 11 and 12 to Article 4 concerning the importance of dissemination of the results of European employment strategy. I share your concern to ensure consistency and complementarity between the activities under this decision and those in other Community programmes set out in Amendment No 13. Accordingly, I can accept in spirit the relevant amendments for this purpose.
Regarding the first part of Amendment No 14, there seems to be a misunderstanding. Provision for cooperation with the Employment Committee is made in Article 8. The amendment which seeks to refer to this also in Article 7 is therefore superfluous. Regarding the second part of Amendment No 14 relating to the representation of women in these committees, the Commission has already achieved a gender balance in committees and we have a goal of a participation of at least 40% of each gender in every committee and expert group. This specific target concerning committees and expert groups is laid down very clearly in the Commission's decision of 19 June 2000. This is part of a wider effort to increase the number of women in decision-making positions in economics and in policy. The inclusion of a specific provision regarding the representation in a number of employment-related committees is however beyond the scope of the decision in question. Parliament could play an important role in the nomination of men and women in these committees.
So, I cannot accept Amendment No 14. Amendment No 15 relating to creating linkages with the competent specialist committee of the European Parliament has to be rejected on institutional grounds.
As far as the budget is concerned, the budget of EUR 55 million which has been proposed for implementation of this decision and the staff resources necessary for the Commission to implement it effectively have been carefully calculated. They reflect the amount foreseen in the financial programming of the Commission within Category III expenditure. Accordingly, I cannot accept a significant increase in the budget as this would inhibit effective and efficient implementation of the programme. I therefore cannot accept Amendments Nos 16 and 17.
To sum up, I can accept in spirit Amendments Nos 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13. I can also accept parts of Amendments Nos 6 and 10. For the reasons I have already put forward I must reject Amendments Nos 4, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18.
I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Jensen, for the considerable and valuable contribution which she has made. I had to refer in detail to the amendments which is why I had to speak for such a long time.
Before starting my speech and my references to the amendments I would like to reply to Mr Bushill-Matthews. I would say to him that women are not a group, they are not a minority, they are not a category. They are 51% of the population. Women comprise many groups. It is a horizontal problem so do not confuse the other groups with women. This is why women have their own committee.
We have worked very well together and I can accept the majority of the amendments which you propose. In some cases I would like to accept the spirit of your proposal but with some rewording in order to keep the consistency of the text.
Regarding the first amendment, I agree with a slight rewording that we should further emphasise the strengths of the European employment strategy. Likewise, I accept in spirit Amendment No 2 emphasising the importance of the role which Parliament plays in European employment policy. In relation to Amendment No 3 on Article 2, I can accept it in spirit. I will accordingly propose wording which takes account of both parts of the amendment. I quote: "examining and promulgating methods of cooperation with the social partners, relevant local and regional interests and enacting an active information policy".
A number of amendments relate to Article 3, which deals with the activities which will be carried out under this programme. Allow me to refer specifically to Amendment No 4 regarding Article 3(1). For Amendment No 5, I accept in spirit the need to assess the ways in which all interest groupings which have a contribution to make have been involved in the implementation of national action plans.
I can similarly accept the call in Amendment No 6 for a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the facts of the European employment strategy and for an analysis of the relationship between that and general economic and other policy areas. However, it is not within the scope of this programme to arrive at conclusions on the transferability of the approach and method of the employment strategy to other policy areas. I very much agree that we must strengthen the Luxembourg approach. We have already extended it in other policies, for example exclusion policy, but we cannot use it here. So I cannot accept the last part of Amendment No 6.
Consistent with my policy approach in other legislative proposals which I have advanced, I support the advocacy of assistance for Member States in relation to equal opportunities for men and women. A number of amendments to various paragraphs in Article 3 have been put forward in relation to equal opportunities. I welcome this but to avoid the duplication and excessive detail on specific projects to be supported I am proposing a new addition to Article 3(2) so as to more explicitly take account of our mutual objectives in this context. This will cover all the issues raised in Amendments Nos 7, 8 and 9 such as analysis and monitoring, development of indicators, parental leave and part-time working and the publication of reports.
For similar reasons I cannot accept Amendment No 18 and I would reply to Mr Fatuzzo that the analysis of employment developments relating to the ageing of the population is already covered by Article 3(1). Other specific problems deal with policy activities relating to the elderly, disabled and vulnerable groups.
Amendment No 4 also concerns equal opportunities. Article 3 of the decision indicates that the analysis to be undertaken under this programme will to the maximum extent possible be gender-specific. While I fully agree with the need for, and importance of, gender-specific analysis I am obliged to recognise that there are problems with the data and with the statistical services in many Member States. We are actively working with Eurostat and with Member States, and this is one of our main recommendations for employment strategy in the joint employment report for many Member States, but we must admit that we have big problems with many Member States as far as the data is concerned. So I regret that I cannot accept this amendment."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples