Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-15-Speech-4-213"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010315.12.4-213"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs is competent ‘to protect the conditions of life and work, including the work environment’. This fine definition authorises us, therefore, to examine the situation of our assistants. Indeed it obliges us to do so. It would be odd if the committee I have the honour of chairing were responsible for all workers in Europe, the sole exception being the assistants in the European Parliament. That has, in fact, been the strange situation up to the present time.
Far be it from me, however, to trespass on the competencies of the specific bodies of the European Parliament! That is why, Commissioner, when we heard the representatives of the assistants, we did it in the presence and with the cooperation of Vice-President Onesta, who was instructed by the Bureau of our Parliament to deal with these problems. Now the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs wants to make its contribution to the quest for innovative solutions. Most of our colleagues are fully familiar with the problems faced by the assistants, which range from job insecurity to the difficulties of legal establishment on Belgian territory, where many of them live.
The Bureau of the European Parliament has already taken a crucial internal decision designed to improve transparency in the management of secretarial allowances, which was mentioned in Mr Onesta’s report. I welcome this decision. It will enable assistants to have an employment contract in the prescribed form, social security cover, which not all of them have, and occupational accident insurance. There are, however, other problems that have not been resolved. These relate essentially to the specific situation of assistants, who are de facto cross-border workers, without their rights as such being recognised.
That is why the expert study commissioned by the European Commission contemplated using existing European legislation on the free circulation of workers and to incorporate into it the specific situation of parliamentary assistants. This solution appears both realistic and reasonable. It is realistic because much vaunted Regulation No1408/71, which all my parliamentary colleagues are familiar with and which governs the free circulation of workers, students and pensioners, etc, is not a text which has been set in stone. For more than five years it has been subjected by the Council to a process of simplification, dusting-down and improvement, which is to be wound up under the Belgian Presidency. At least that is what the European Parliament hopes.
This year we are being presented with amendments to the text. During the last part-session I think I understood correctly that a large number of my fellow Members wanted a general overhaul of the text rather than just technical improvements. Nonetheless, in February we approved the last amendment that both the Council and the Commission asked us to approve. In other words this text could easily be modified and adapted to the situation of the assistants and it could enable them to choose the country of establishment when it comes to matters of social security payments and it could guarantee their other rights to social protection.
This realistic solution is also reasonable. The Council wanted the European Parliament to reform its relations with its assistants in the name of transparency. This first step was achieved thanks to the decision to which I have referred. It does not wish to tackle tax issues. Recourse to Regulation No 1408/71 does not make this necessary. Fine! The Council does not want to give assistants the status of officials. This is not what we are asking – it is very different. What we want is simply to guarantee their fundamental rights to social protection. In other words, all the conditions have now been met and we can now make real headway in this area. That is the reason, Commissioner, for our question to the Commission, which has always expressed its determination to make headway in this area hand-in-hand with the European Parliament. The Commission has the political initiative, but we now ask it to make use of it and to formally present a proposal to amend Regulation No 1408/71 by adding a simple subparagraph covering the situation of the assistants. It is then up to the Council to shoulder its responsibilities and to decide whether or not to keep our assistants and ourselves in a state of legal and social uncertainty.
The European Parliament has already embarked on internal work to set the ball rolling. The way forward depends on the normal legislative process. It is up to the Commission to put forward a proposal now and Parliament will then be able to complete its work to issue internal regulations to deal with the question of the assistants.
That is the thinking behind our question to the Commission. Within what timeframe, Commissioner, will this crucial text be proposed? The best solution would be before the start of the Belgian Presidency, since our assistants work in Belgium. It is a pressing matter, Commissioner, and it also affects the ethics and image of our Parliament."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples