Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-310"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.11.2-310"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like to endorse the rapporteur's positive appraisal of the Commission's proposal for a regulation. It is precisely because the private economy is failing to live up to its responsibility and create secure jobs that we need more aid to promote employment in the European Union. You only have to think about current mass unemployment and the different situations in the regions to realise that this regulation is crucial, because it creates greater transparency, cuts red tape, provides legal security and improves comparability and, with it, we shall soon be in a position to judge how effective aid is.
It is interesting to note that national employment policies in the European Union have changed, gearing towards the common objectives of the employment strategy, with action plans being used as levers. But what struck us in this context is that the current employment guidelines make no reference to growth or to the desirable or undesirable effects of employment aid. We need to call for finishing touches to be put to the employment guidelines in the interests of mainstreaming and the coherence of European employment policies. We need to clarify that the contribution of both sides – employment policy and competition policy – to the European employment strategy can be guaranteed. I think that, in the proposal before us, the Commission rightly recognises the need to allow state measures in the form of employment incentives for companies, especially for certain disadvantaged groups. This is not just a logical consequence of the objectives set in Lisbon. Full employment is and always will be one of the most important objectives of the Lisbon strategy, Barcelona confirmed that. Which is why we must call for finishing touches in the form of a more flexible definition of which groups are to benefit. I think that the age limit of 25 should be raised to 30 and that the age limit for older employees should be dropped from 55 to 50, because society relies on both, young people entering employment and older people remaining in employment.
I should also like to call for special care to be taken to ensure that the differentiation which the Commission rightly makes in its proposal between small and medium-sized enterprises and large companies does in fact apply when this proposal is implemented."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples