Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-05-Speech-2-181"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060905.23.2-181"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I would like to start by thanking the two rapporteurs, who have worked very well together. The report they have produced is a good one. I am often asked, when back home in Sweden, whether there really is a European social model or whether what we really have is a collection of different models. My response is that, while it is true that our social systems are different, they also have a great deal in common and it is that commonality which constitutes the European social model. We all have systems that build on solidarity with those who are unemployed or sick or who have suffered industrial injuries. We all have a public sector through which we pay for what is common, to somewhat differing degrees. We also have the social partners and civil society, which play a large part in the process whereby we shape our societies. These are the common distinguishing characteristics.
If the social model is based on common values within different systems, this means that we can learn from one another in the course of the process that we now find ourselves in. It is, of course, not the case that the social model or the various social systems cannot be changed. As so many speakers in this debate have said, they must be constantly amended - the systems themselves, that is to say, rather than the values underpinning them.
The two great challenges today are demographic change and globalisation. In view of the demographic change, we must also show solidarity with the next generation. Thus, the next generation must not have to spend an unreasonable amount of what it produces on those of us retiring and requiring large amounts of medical care. We therefore have to create sustainable pension systems.
We must, however, also ensure that we create a working environment that makes it possible for people to remain in the job market for longer. Amongst other things, this means having reasonable working hours. We must have skills development whereby the older section of the workforce is also able to be involved in the changes in skills development and other such matters and whereby such workers are thus able to carry on working. This would mean that we would have more workers in the labour market. Perhaps we will also need to accept more people from countries outside Europe in the future, which in all likelihood will be the case.
As far as globalisation is concerned, there are two ways to go. The first of these is to copy the economies of our competitors, China and India, namely in terms of wages, labour market conditions and the like. The second way is for us to attempt to compete, in fact, by having well-trained staff and by engaging in research and development and so on, which would mean that our workers and the products they produce would be the best in the world. This does, however, require security in the labour market, since it involves change and restructuring. People involved in a changing labour market need to feel secure. I know that the Finnish Presidency is referring to this as ‘security in the midst of change’ rather than as ‘flexicurity’, but it amounts to the same thing. If you feel secure, you are also able to participate in the work of bringing about change and the development of Europe. Then we can develop our social systems in such a way that they become a productive factor in the work of bringing about change."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples