Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-17-Speech-4-247"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010517.13.4-247"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, on behalf of my group, I insisted that we should have the opportunity to hold this debate in light of the tidal wave of restructuring programmes announced in countries across the Union. It is particularly timely today because, following the recent mobilisation of employees from the Danone group in Calais, the employees of Marks [amp] Spencer are now holding a large European demonstration in London.
In the eyes of the public, Marks [amp] Spencer, following its decision to close 38 shops and to make thousands of employees redundant has, like Danone, come to represent one of the most abhorrent symbols of the strategy known as ‘shareholder value’, of shareholder law and of the social irresponsibility of major companies.
This is the eighth time since the Michelin affair in October 1999 that I have spoken in Parliament to warn the Council and the Commission of the urgent need to confirm the social responsibility of companies and to establish meaningful rights for employees. Until now, we have merely received evasive answers extending the due date and the long-awaited revised directive on informing and consulting workers has been our Loch Ness monster: everyone has been talking about it but no one has seen hide nor hair of it.
The European public is now demanding practical and meaningful measures. I feel that as far as the workers who are affected and many other people are concerned, the Union has staked part of its credibility on this issue.
Therefore, Commissioner, I would like you to give clear answers to three questions.
First of all, a draft, revised directive on informing and consulting workers has existed since 1998. You mentioned it yourself and it is cautious and to my mind, quite inadequate. Nevertheless, the Council, to this day, refuses to review it. If I have understood you properly, Commissioner, you are going to push for the Council of 11 June to override the veto exercised by the United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark and even Germany, whose Chancellor has just tried to pass himself off as a European visionary. You also intend, if I have understood correctly, to introduce a system of penalties for companies who breach the directive’s provisions. Have I understood correctly?
My second question is this: the directive on establishing a European works councils dates back to 1995. To this day, only a minority of companies concerned has implemented the directive. Incidentally, these bodies are basically talking shops without any real power. The Nice European Council stipulated that this directive should be revised, and I quote, ‘by 2002’, which would require setting the procedure in motion immediately. I feel that the Commission’s working programme for 2001 ignores this problem. Why is this the case, Commissioner, and what do you intend to do now? Do you plan to give this future works council real prerogatives, such as the right to suspend a restructuring plan and the time to examine an alternative project to the one laid down by the management?
Lastly, and with this point I shall conclude, the European Parliament has declared itself to be in favour of systematic verification that social and employment obligations are being met by every company that benefits from Community aid. Parliament has also requested that, each time the Commission makes a statement on a company merger plan, it makes its assent conditional on the employees’ rights being respected. What are your plans on this matter?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples