Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-28-Speech-3-067"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071128.15.3-067"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great pleasure to stand here today as rapporteur. The negotiations in Parliament have been completed, and we can present a balanced report that reflects attitudes across the entire political spectrum. The whole concept behind these guidelines on flexicurity is to tackle the challenges faced by the labour markets of Europe. Note that I use the plural, ‘labour markets’, because the report recognises that there is no ‘one size fits all’ as far as flexicurity is concerned. Although there is no common model for flexicurity, we must recognise that Europe faces many common challenges in its labour markets that require a joint response. The demographic challenges mean that in 2050 there will be 1.5 employees for every pensioner. Currently, the figure is 3 employees per pensioner. Around 100 million Europeans are living in or on the threshold of poverty. The effects of inequality can be seen all too easily when you compare countries where there are major differences, such as those in Eastern and Western Europe. However, they can also be seen internally in countries where we are witnessing increasing inequality. Six percent of employees in Europe can be characterised as ‘working poor’ and a growing number are experiencing poorer working conditions with uncertain employment circumstances and very poor working conditions. Short-term contracts and temporary work are on the increase, and the ordinary open-ended employment contract is under threat. Such precarious employment amounts to 12% in Europe. In addition, undeclared and unlawful employment is increasing. In some countries, unlawful employment accounts for almost 15% of all employment. This development is something that we must turn around, partly because it is expensive for Europe and partly because these uncertain and unstable employment circumstances often affect the weaker groups in society.
Education is Europe’s most important raw material in the competitive global market, but it is not being given enough attention. In fact, 15% of our young people are leaving the education system too soon, at a time when the labour market is placing major demands upon knowledge. Those who do not jump on the education bandwagon will experience difficulties in the long term, and we therefore have an obligation to help such people.
Thus, the challenges are clear to Europe. Our responsibility is to deliver a message and a vision of how we will tackle these challenges. In this connection I would like to thank the Commission for its excellent contribution. We have enjoyed good cooperation in connection with the report, in which my role has naturally been to gather up the loose ends here in this House. My perception as rapporteur is that there is a need for a stronger focus on the social Europe, to ensure that workers’ rights are respected throughout the EU and for us to have more and better jobs. Greater flexibility within organisations must not come about at the expense of employees’ working conditions. How can we ensure this? The report specifically emphasises the need for the open-ended employment contract to become the standard contract type in Europe. Secondly, we must ensure that social partners are involved to a greater extent. That decisions cannot be taken above the heads of employees lies at the heart of a flexible and secure labour market. The inclusion of employees is absolutely essential, and this cannot be emphasised enough in the implementation of flexicurity strategies.
Finally, the report is concerned with what we might call the framework for flexicurity. In other words, the national terms and conditions for implementing flexibility and security. Flexibility and flexicurity cost money. However, it is not wasted money; it is by contrast money that is invested and produces a bonus. For example, if you invest in your workforce, it might perhaps be an expense in the short term, but experience has shown that it will pay dividends in the longer term. Therefore, flexicurity as we understand the concept in Northern Europe requires a welfare state of a certain calibre and size. In this connection we must be honest and say that the developments that we are witnessing in some countries, where there is competition for lower and lower taxes, will make it very difficult to finance the security aspect of flexicurity. Therefore, I will attempt once and for all to silence all the voices that claim that flexicurity is a neo-liberal concept aimed at undermining the rights of employees. This is not the case; on the contrary.
In conclusion, I hope that, through this debate here in this House and around Europe, we will be able to dispel some of the myths that abound in connection with flexicurity. As rapporteur, I have, with considerable help from my colleagues, been able to draw up some balanced guidelines for flexicurity, guidelines that show how Europe should develop its labour market in the future in order to make it both competitive and social. With such a strategy, we will also discover how to tackle the uncertainty that exists amongst employees in Europe. Many are currently afraid that their jobs will be relocated and that their place in the labour market will become superfluous.
Finally, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteur, the rapporteurs from the other committees and everyone else who has otherwise contributed to this report. I will conclude by expressing the hope that the Heads of State or Government will incorporate Parliament’s recommendations in their further work towards achieving the common guidelines for flexicurity when they meet in Portugal in December."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples