Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-03-Speech-1-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010903.6.1-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, on behalf of the Group of the Greens, I should like to say a few words on this subject. Immediately before the summer recess, we experienced the difficult situation involving the Take-over Directive, the social aspect of which, in particular, appeared unacceptable to a majority of this House. We can be very clear about this. In this case, the Directive is certainly acceptable, although I share the view of Mr Rothley and others that it is still deficient. However, that is due to a number of other factors.
Ideally, we should have liked to have seen a kind of package deal emerge, combining the Take-over Directive and the European Company Directive, which would also have taken care of aspects related to participation, information and consultation. At the moment we are facing the difficult situation in which things happen in a certain sequence but in which we cannot entirely follow their interconnection.
In the final analysis, we naturally agree that, in the framework of what we would then term ‘a European social model’, use should be made of the information and consultation rules that have been included in the reports of Mr Menrad and Mr Mayer which are, by the way, excellent, in my opinion. We should like this to be done in a non-Anglo-Saxon manner, as I indicated in connection with the Take-over Directive.
If we now compare the European works council, as it exists at the moment, with the legislation under discussion with regard to information and consultation, then this comparison works out in favour of the current model. However, as will immediately be evident from the document, we still have the improvement of the European works council ahead of us. A great deal needs to be done there, so much so that I am not sure what the exact outcome will be.
We therefore ultimately agree on this approach. With regard to information and consultation, we are naturally keen advocates of what is being described as ‘Rhineland working relations’. We accept this as what might be called a minimum guideline.
For a number of countries, such as Austria, Germany and the Netherlands, the transposition into national legislation will therefore be of the utmost importance, because they generally apply superior regulations, and adaptation could prove problematical.
Finally, I would draw your attention to the fact that I especially support Mr Menrad’s Amendment No 7 concerning the definition of ‘participation’. It is a challenge for the Commissioner to agree to this and also to handle the legal bases correctly."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples