Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-12-13-Speech-1-160"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101213.18.1-160"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I do not wish to re-open a debate with my fellow Member, Mrs Oomen-Ruijten, but rather just to dot the ‘i’s and cross the ‘t’s.
The debate has not been in any way personal, and no one has called her work into question. If they had called it into question, I would say straightaway that she has done an excellent job on the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.
However, if Mrs Oomen-Ruijten says that she has tabled amendments for tomorrow’s sitting that improve the text and provide equality, I have to say that this is not the case. Mrs Oomen-Ruijten has put her name to the amendments to the texts – which I have here – that the Council did not succeed in introducing during the dialogue we had with the Council. These are not amendments by Mrs Oomen-Ruijten; they are the Council’s text word-for-word. With regard to the posting of workers, the Council has a much more unequal position than the Commission.
We would be prepared to accept the Commission’s original text, but the text from the Council states that all posted workers, including those who are covered by the 1996 directive, are also excluded from this directive. This amendment does not, therefore, provide greater equality but rather greater inequality.
I would like to reiterate my personal regard for Mrs Oomen-Ruijten. She is undoubtedly an excellent MEP whose work is very good, but ultimately, she has aligned herself with the Council’s view."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples