Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-12-Speech-2-176"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-12-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061212.37.2-176"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-12-12-Speech-2-1772
lpv:speaker	lp:Diamanto Manolakou2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2008-05-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2008-05-19)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2008-05-19)3 member; AGRI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-15--2008-05-19)3 unknown; Kommounistiko Komma Elladas (2004-07-20--2008-05-19)3 substitute; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". The primary reasoning of the ‘effort to prevent injuries’ is to invest in sectors that will offer something back. They promote cost-gain reasons instead of health. We disagree with these free market motives that drive this so-called effort to prevent injuries. Dissimilar incidents are being lumped together and addressed within the framework of individual responsibility on the grounds that they all classify as injuries. The true causes of accidents are being concealed, thereby sending the strategy for preventing and addressing them off the rails. Personal responsibility is stated as the main cause of these ‘injuries’ in order to cover up managerial liability for accidents at work. The promotion of ‘safe behaviour’ conceals the need for a prevention strategy directed at taking collective measures that safeguard safety in areas where employees work and live. They are aiming at burdening the employee, directly or indirectly, with the managerial obligation and cost of preventing accidents at work. Their end objective is to promote further intensification of work and reduction of labour cost. The State is largely to blame. In order to serve free economy, it does not carry out essential controls; it accepts criminal omissions and imperfections in projects from businessmen, which in turn increases the risk of accidents. Accident prevention should be enforced by the state on a regular basis, providing detail on the actual causes; moreover the bodies recording and investigating these accidents should be state controlled. Insurance coverage of occupational hazard, the creation of a state body of workforce doctors and safety technicians will provide the foundation for a systematic prevention of accidents at work."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph