Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-11-Speech-3-155"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091111.17.3-155"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am grateful that we are able to debate this topic today, as it is such an important one. I would like to make one thing absolutely clear: as Parliament, we have not merely played a part, but we have ensured that, in this Services Directive, a very positive, constructive compromise was found. This compromise is based, in particular, on guaranteeing labour and social rights and on the particular regard for and removal of the services of general economic interest. That was the reason why a Services Directive was possible in the first place.
However, there are a few things than I am not sure about in this regard, and the questions that we raised have not been answered. It would, for example, be very disappointing if what I have heard from various sources turned out to be true, namely, that some Member States are using the transposition of the Services Directive to destroy the balance that we, as legislators, have found by not fully respecting the rights of workers as we envisaged in the Services Directive. This relates not only to the working conditions, which are being called into question, but in many Member States, the definitions are also being re-written or made more restrictive. There are also Member States which, with feeble justifications, are not removing the social services from amongst the services to which this transposition relates.
In this respect, the European Commission’s Handbook was not very helpful, because the guidelines that it gave were partly wrong and it provided an interpretation that was, in our opinion, incorrect. The examples that I have given show how important it is for us also to create a legal framework for services of general economic interest, so that social rights, such as labour rights, can also be fully and completely respected once again. Anything else would not be sufficient.
I would also like to ask the Member States to what extent they have involved the stakeholders and, in particular, the trade unions and the social services, in the transposition. This is a question that we raised, but to which I have not heard an answer, and I would very much like a good answer to this question."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples