Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-20-Speech-3-037"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070620.2.3-037"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we all agree that workers’ mobility needs to be promoted. However, in many Member States, such as Luxembourg, Austria and Germany, this directive will have a huge impact on all occupational pension systems. Only 1.5% of workers move to an employer in another Member State, but the other 98.5% of workers who remain in their Member State will also be affected by the directive. I should like to say this to Mrs Jöns: it is these workers who we will be damaging if occupational pensions, which are of course voluntary, are no longer offered by companies because they are no longer affordable. Entire national systems could collapse.
Occupational pensions are of huge importance in the light of our ageing population. However, companies are under no obligation to offer occupational pensions. Applying the directive to defined-benefit pensions – as is currently envisaged – would penalise those companies that have given extensive pension guarantees in the past. We are running the risk here of companies withdrawing their voluntary occupational pensions.
In addition, according to the current proposal of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, people are to acquire pension rights immediately on reaching their 25th birthday, without there being any vesting period. This would mean an enormous increase in both bureaucracy and costs, making the whole scheme unaffordable. Adjusting the pension rights of inactive scheme members to the value of the rights of active workers – indexation – would increase costs by 30%. This was the main reason why the Dutch Minister for Social Affairs and Employment voted against the directive.
We need reliable, predictable and affordable rules. We are in favour of mobility, but on such conditions that the occupational pensions systems, which are so important for workers, are not put at risk.
Should the relevant amendments not be adopted, in the interests of workers I will be voting against the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples