Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-307"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.11.2-307"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Council Regulation (EC) 994/98 contains the provision that the Commission should approve regulations on block exemption which exempt certain aid from the obligation to notify the Commission, employing a technique already used successfully in the field of anti-competitive behaviour.
Finally, in the report adopted certain paragraphs have been introduced in relation to the preference for employment flexibility measures over aid for the promotion of employment. I am not going to get involved in refuting this idea, which – like all ideas expressed in such emphatic terms – reflects a rigid and distinctly conservative approach, which I cannot agree with. But, quite simply, the honourable Members will have to recognise that whatever the ideological position they hold, this is a strange and extravagant idea at this time, which should not appear in the report, since it relates to other issues. To insist on it would imply an excessive interest in sending messages in favour of a certain action, which cannot be shared by important sectors, both in Parliament and in European society.
So far, the Commission has approved the Regulations on SMEs, training and minimums, and now it is proposing a Regulation on employment aid.
I would like to start by making a series of observations. Firstly, that the proposal we are currently analysing, although it is not being modified, improves the existing system. There is currently no regulation on block exemption in this field and the guidelines on this type of aid are based on a series of diverse communications which are not regulatory. The fact that certain aid with clear criteria is being exempted from the obligation to notify, although those criteria may be insufficient, represents considerable progress in terms of transparency and legal certainty, which we must not fail to recognise.
Secondly, I would like to insist that this does not mean that aid without the characteristics included in the Regulation will be considered illegal. Not at all. All it implies is that such aid will have to be subject to notification, in order to analyse whether or not it contradicts the objectives of the Treaty. And we must not forget that these objectives do not just include maintaining a system in which competition is not distorted, but also the promotion of employment.
Thirdly, certain possible scenarios should be stipulated in order prevent the administrations who grant the aid – particularly the regional authorities in the case of Spain and also in other Member States – from being subject to long procedures involving notification when granting aid aimed at promoting employment, especially in sectors in which workers are most affected by unemployment.
To this end, and in line with the objectives of the Lisbon strategy, we must propose support for the transformation of employment contracts into permanent contracts and greater flexibility in defining the different groups of workers who will benefit, as well as adapting them to the particular characteristics of each region, and the inclusion amongst the exempted aid of aid aimed at promoting the employment of women and, finally, extending the age range, so that young workers – or those who are in the final stage of their working life – can benefit from aid without the need for modification.
All these criteria, included in Amendment No 1 from the Group of the Party of European Socialists, are aimed directly at promoting employment in the least-favoured sectors, and their inclusion in the Regulation in no way distorts competition. The comparison of the anti-competitive effects of this aid with other types of aid, if we analyse it soberly, is something of an insult to the intelligence.
We are not going to get into a debate here on public aid and its effects on competition, but, if there is any public aid worthy of being seen as compatible with the objectives of the Treaty, then that is the aid aimed at promoting employment.
It would not be good to give the European citizens and workers the impression that the Commission shows signs of flexibility when allowing other types of aid, while being extraordinarily strict when it comes to employment aid. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to include the social economy sector – in a general sense – as an exempt sector. As all the honourable Members know, social economy companies provide a significant cushion in terms of maintaining employment when there is crisis in a sector, and that reality should be reflected in the Regulation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples