Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-14-Speech-3-058"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010214.3.3-058"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, I have to say that my assessment of the Lisbon resolutions and, above all, of the goal, so often evoked in this House, of making the economy of the European Union the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, can be summed up like this: it is an empty, rhetorical formula with little or nothing to do with what is or is not really happening in the economies of the European countries. Yesterday, Alan Greenspan told us that the United States economy will only grow by 2.5% in 2001 and unemployment will rise by 0.5%, from 4% to 4.5%. Those are the statistics of a dynamic and competitive economy. For us, those statistics would represent a boom in economic growth, while the United States economy is considered to be in recession.
I appreciate the work done by Mr Bullmann and Mr Gasòliba i Böhm – in particular I fully support the Gasòliba report – but I think that it may amount to too little because Parliament is given too little to discuss and propose.
For example, the Bullmann report talks about modernising the pension systems, a subject also mentioned by Commissioner Solbes. Well, if we are going to talk about practical things to be done and not just high-flown goals, Parliament should make its voice heard in a much stronger, more decisive, more rigorous way, and call urgently for a reform which leads to financially sustainable social security systems which are less unfair in terms of balance between the generations.
In Europe, we are irresponsibly consuming the national insurance contributions of young people. What are they going to get, 20 or 40 years from now, in return for the high contributions they have to pay today? Reforms are needed, either of the parameters by raising the minimum pensionable age, or of the system by – as I believe would be appropriate – changing to a capitalisation system for compulsory national insurance, and not – that would be the last straw – just for supplementary national insurance.
In the dynamic economy dominating the world today – the United States' economy – there is concern about social security deficits which will begin to show up in 2025 and will have used up the accumulated capital reserves only in 2037. In Europe and in many European countries – I am particularly thinking of my own country, Italy – we are irresponsibly heading for disaster in the social security accounts. In Europe, we have no way of defeating the corporate resistance of those – I am thinking primarily of the trade unions – championing pensioners and people retiring on the backs of young workers – the lucky ones – and young jobless, supported by the very high national insurance contributions which depress employment.
I am very much in favour Tony Blair’s proposal for a Europe where people can work after the age of 65, because I come from a country where people retire at 55 and even younger, and their pensions are paid for by the contributions of younger workers.
In conclusion, Mr President, let us talk less about goals we all agree on – who would not want Europe to be a dynamic economy? – and a bit more about the choices, some of them painful and difficult, which need to be made as soon as possible."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples