Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-02-Speech-2-153"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030902.7.2-153"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, today's regulation is a milestone in our history. We want to modernise, we want to simplify and we have been working on that for more than 10 years now. It looks as if we are now nearing the end today, in the first reading. Please excuse me, Mrs Lambert – I would normally thank the rapporteur first, but this time I would like to commend the Commission services, firstly Director Rob Cornelissen, who has not only convinced the Council but has also supported us with his advice and actions, and our other colleagues and in particular Herwig Verschueren, who also made a major contribution. That is not all, Madam President; I will be coming back to that shortly. Amendments have been submitted by all groups in Parliament. What we want is for this regulation to be ready in time for the coming enlargement. That is absolutely essential. Furthermore, the social security regulation is being established through the codecision procedure, while the Council is demanding unanimity. The IGC changes that, and quite rightly so. I am now going to list its blessings. The scope of applicability of the regulation has been extended. Everyone living in the territory of the Member State legally will now be treated equally. In other words, they will have the same rights and obligations as citizens of the Member State.
Moreover, we have not sorted out a problem that occurs where a social security system is subject to the country of employment principle, but tax legislation is not in step with it. That is another point where I would like to see a logical arrangement. All in all, however, I am very satisfied with the proposal.
Secondly, acquired rights will be preserved for all time. The export of rights in the context of social security has now been established clearly and unambiguously for the first time, even if only certain periods are insured in some Member States.
Thirdly, the rules on pensions are being greatly simplified. The arrangements for early retirement, which have caused problems for so many people, will also, where such problems still exist, be included in the coordination.
Fourthly, there is more clarity regarding the rights of people who fall ill abroad. If acute help is needed abroad, then everyone has the same rights. Furthermore, we would very much welcome an amendment in which the requirement for permission to go abroad for medical treatment is amended to reflect the most recent decisions of the Court. In other words – incidentally, there is a grammatical error in the English text – no special permission is needed for outpatient care, although it would be needed for in-patient care.
Cross-border workers. The retired cross-border worker maintains his rights in the country in which he worked. What is new is that cross-border workers’ family members are also getting rights.
Unemployment. Opportunities for the unemployed are being improved; the unemployed will be able to look for work abroad under certain conditions without losing benefits. Incidentally, my colleagues and I have submitted an amendment on that point; I would like the Council to say a unanimous ‘‘yes’ to an amendment that gives Luxembourg a transitional period of five years, as it is particularly affected by the new regulation because of the large number of cross-border workers there. They will then have the opportunity to adapt to the new benefits system in the country in which they are working and availability for the labour market there. There are also amendments on the provision of living allowances, and so on. The new text for Article No 55 – which Mrs Lambert has already mentioned – is much better and I hope that it will receive support.
The eighth point; people with disabilities will no longer lose their benefits when they move to a Member State. I am very pleased about that, especially in the Year of the Disabled.
The ninth point; not immediately obvious but nonetheless of importance is the paragraph that establishes that where problems exist, the Member States can no longer drag these out but are required to find actual solutions within a specific time.
Two brief points; the first is the question of homosexual marriage, an issue that has been much discussed. Is the Commissioner of the opinion that the coordination regulation is the right place to compel the thirteen Member States that do not recognise the marriage of homosexual couples and have not incorporated it in their family law to do so via the regulation? Would Amendment No 20 not cause the regulation to run into problems? I do have sympathy for Amendment No 49."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples