Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-276"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030923.8.2-276"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we are concerned here with the Commission’s Communication on Adequate and Sustainable Pensions and with an analysis of whether, in their first Strategy Reports, the Member States have complied with the three overarching aims of the common pensions policy. The first of these is whether pensions are adequate and whether we have set future pensions at a level sufficient to prevent poverty and provide a reasonable standard of living. The second is whether pensions are economically sustainable in the long term so that future generations do not have an unnecessarily large economic burden placed upon them. The third is whether pensions are sufficiently up-to-date to cope with the new situation, characterised by atypical jobs and more and more women in the labour market.
We think that the Commission’s communication is sound. The Commission has carried out a sound analysis. In Parliament, we have tried to distance ourselves from the national debates on various national changes to the pensions systems. We have tried to stick to our task at EU level, namely that of setting up objectives for the common strategy we are to have at EU level. The Member States must themselves deal with the purely practical proposals for the pensions systems.
We have a number of viewpoints. First of all, there must be a balance between social and economic considerations. It is important for economic development that we have sustainable pensions systems. That applies especially to those countries that are involved in cooperation in connection with the euro, but also to other countries, so that we obtain sustainable economic development. It is at least as important, however, for us to address the social aspects that affect people’s living standards. We must ensure that people have a comfortable standard of living in later years, not hugely different from that they enjoyed when gainfully employed, and that they do not end up in poverty.
Pensions systems still reveal a lack of equality. Women’s pensions are not as large as men’s. In some cases, that has to do with the pensions systems, but the main reason is women’s position in the labour market. Women have, to a larger extent, lower paid jobs, part-time work and a lower level of employment. That means that the Lisbon process is the most important thing in this connection.
The situation for those who have atypical jobs is not satisfactory either, especially when it comes to the supplementary pensions on which the two sides of industry are agreeing. There is good reason to address these problems.
The absolutely most important thing if we are to meet our commitments in the future is that we obtain growth and full employment. It is therefore important for us to link these aims to the Lisbon process and to the employment and economic guidelines and for us to take a global view. We very often talk about solidarity between our generations here and now, and it is important that there be solidarity right now between the generations. In view of demographic development, it is, however, at least as important that we talk about solidarity with future generations so that we ourselves – and I personally belong to the generation born in the forties – do not indulge ourselves too much now with the result that future generations of earners have to contend with unreasonably high costs when we become pensioners. We must ensure that that will not be the case with the new pensions systems. We must show solidarity with future generations.
What caused most discussion in the committee was the actual and/or statutory pensionable age. We are not interfering with the statutory pensionable age. It is paradoxical that the elder portion of the population is becoming healthier and healthier – which is a good thing – at the same time as it is working less and less. We are today working less than we did thirty years ago. There are many reasons for this. If something is missing from the Commission’s communication, it is perhaps an overall picture of how the actual pensionable age is to be increased. We are concerned here with financial incentives, but we are also concerned with matters such as lifelong learning, the organisation of work and problems involving the working environment, so that older people can also remain in the labour market. We must change working life in such a way that people can remain actively in work and not be excluded from it.
We shall then also address the subject of enlargement.
Finally, I wish to thank all those who have helped us obtain a broad, if not complete, consensus in the committee. We have enjoyed sound cooperation in the committee."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples