Committee on Employment and Social Affairs Ordinary meeting
Legende
Markierungen im Transkript
- Text Aktuell abgespielter Satz
- Text Suchergebnis
- Text Redebeitrag, auf den der geöffnete Link verweist
Klicken Sie auf einen Satz, um das Video ab dieser Stelle abzuspielen. Markieren Sie Text, um ihn mit Redner, Zeitstempel und Link zu zitieren.
Weitere Optionen
Versatz
Versatz des Transkripts
Exportieren
Live aufgezeichnet
Versionen dieses Videos
- Aufzeichnung Endgültige Version · 2. Juni 2026
- Live aufgezeichnet Live übertragen am 2. Juni 2026Angezeigt
Die Transkripte können sich von Version zu Version leicht unterscheiden.
EMPL European Parliament
Ihren Sitzungen folgenLi Andersson
Thank you and then the floor to the shadow rapporteurs starting Mrs. Verbrugh from the Patriots.
Mélanie Disdier
Oui, merci. Merci bien chers collègues, chers rapporteurs. Les choses en fait n'ont pas évolué depuis la dernière fois où nous avons débattu de cette de ce sujet dans cette commission. Donc rien à ajouter sur le fond.
La décision de la conférence des présidents a été ajournée alors que nous aurions pu être fixés dès maintenant. Madame et Monsieur les co-rapporteurs, j'aurais quand même une question. Vos groupes respectifs PPE et S&D ont bien conclu un accord, accord sur lequel vous vous êtes arrogés tous les dossiers du CFP. Vous avez donc forcément les lignes de conduite conclues par votre groupe, par vos groupes. Ainsi, on vous a vus voter aussi en faveur du rapport intérimaire qui parle du FSE autonome et distinct.
Pouvez-vous nous dire, pour dissiper un peu l'incertitude, si vos groupes respectifs vous soutiennent dans cette initiative ? S'ils entendent bien les mots autonome et distinct de la même manière que nous, à savoir l'autonomie des PNR, peut-être même l'autonomie des logiques de jalons et de cibles ? Ou bien faites-vous cavalier seul ? Et si c'est le cas, je crains bien que nous perdions un temps précieux.
Il faut jouer cartes sur table, et ces cartes, vous vous êtes arrangés pour les mettre dans vos manches depuis le début du mandat. C'est donc vous qui pouvez nous dire ce qu'il adviendra, et le plus tôt sera le mieux. Merci.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. I do not have the shadow rapporteur from the ECR here. Oh, sorry, you're there. Sorry, sorry. Mrs. Toaderescu, please, the floor is yours.
Georgiana Teodorescu
Thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, the European Commission sent us this proposal for the next ESF as a flagship for investing in people.
But let us be honest, in its current form it risks being an empty shell. First and most important, the basics are missing: the budget. Without clear and credible funding, this is not a strategy, it is a promise without substance. Second, what is presented as coordination risks becomes control. The tight alignment with the European Semester and centralized programming under national and regional partnership plans may reduce Member States' ability to set their own priorities.
Europe's labor markets are diverse and they require flexibility, not one-size-fits-all governance. How should we improve this proposal?
First of all we need to have a stand-alone ESF with a dedicated budget. We should reduce administrative centralization and avoid micro-management by the Commission. We should ensure genuine flexibility for national labor market models. We should prioritize skills, productivity, demographic resilience and economic competitiveness, not abstract targets detached from economic reality. Funding should empower people into work, not prescribe social outcomes from above.
And finally, we must simplify implementation: fewer rules, fewer reports, more results. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much and my apologies again. Then from Renew, Mrs. Vedrenne.
Marie-Pierre Vedrenne
Yes, thank you very much. We are of course in the middle of the process of getting to the best result for the ESF fund. I think that we all agree that we need to make sure that the goals of the Social Fund are upheld in our future MFF with a standalone ESF when it comes to budget. We think that some relation to the NRPP can be constructive to make sure that we can look also in an integral way. But I think in the, I'm looking forward to the negotiations on the basic of our amendments.
We have proposed a constructive package to make sure that together we can come to the best result.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. And from the Greens, Ms. Ohisalo representing Mr. Somdown.
Maria Ohisalo
Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the co-rapporteurs for the draft and I'm reading this short message on behalf of shadow rapporteurs Ville Sondal and Kir-Mari Peter-Hansen. So it is clear that most of us working on this file agree on what is important for the Social Fund: creating a more just and equal European Union where we help the most vulnerable and where we fight poverty and social exclusion.
It has been a shame that we have spent so much time fighting over what a standalone fund means. We hope that we can find a way to fight for a social union where the social fund is in central, but not the only idea in the system and economy of the EU, where we fight for a social justice and equality. We do not always agree on what the root causes are and what needs to change. As Greens, we hope that we can cooperate in sending a strong signal about the need for a strong ESF regulation where we secure funding for people in vulnerable situations, for gender equality, for children living in poverty, for lifelong learning, education, for a fair labor market and for a just green and digital transition.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And from the Left, representing the shadow Mrs. Galan, I have Mr. Arvanitis.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
Καλημέρα, ευχαριστώ. Μιλώ εκ μέρους της συναδέλφου μου της κυρίας Εστρέγια Γκαλάν, σκιώδους εισηγήτριας της Αριστεράς σχετικά με την παρούσα έκθεση. Πρώτον, θα θέλαμε να ευχαριστήσουμε τους εισηγητές για το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινωνικό Ταμείο. Η συνεργασία ήταν εξαιρετική, οι δίαυλοι διαλόγου παραμένουν πάντα ανοιχτοί. Θα θέλαμε επίσης να ευχαριστήσουμε για την προθυμία τους να διασφαλίσουν ότι το Κοινωνικό Ταμείο θα παραμείνει ένα ανεξάρτητο μέσο και όσο το δυνατόν ισχυρότερο σε μία Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση που νομίζω ότι αγνοεί κοινωνικά προβλήματα που ταλαιπωρούν τους πολίτες.
Σε ό,τι αφορά στις τροπολογίες, η Left έχει επικεντρωθεί βασικά στην ενίσχυση των γενικών και ειδικών στόχων του ταμείου, καθώς και στο αίτημα για έναν προϋπολογισμό τόσο φιλόδοξο όσο η πρόκληση που αντιμετωπίζουμε. Αυτός είναι ο λόγος για τον οποίο ζητήσαμε να διπλασιαστεί και ο προϋπολογισμός του Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου. Αυτό μεταφράζεται επίσης στην εγγύηση για τα παιδιά, η οποία πρέπει να διαθέτει τουλάχιστον 20 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ για την αντιμετώπιση της μάστιγας της παιδικής φτώχειας.
Κατανοούμε ότι το ταμείο πρέπει να συμβαδίζει με τη στρατηγική της Ένωσης για την καταπολέμηση της φτώχειας και για το σκοπό αυτό πρέπει να διαθέτει όχι μόνο επαρκή χρηματοδότηση αλλά και επαρκή αυτονομία και ευελιξία ώστε να μην υποτάσσεται σε πολιτικές προτεραιότητες. Γι' αυτό υποστηρίξαμε ένα ταμείο που δεν θα συνδέεται με τα εθνικά και περιφερειακά σχέδια ώστε να μπορεί πραγματικά να λειτουργήσει ως κινητήρια δύναμη της κοινωνικής συνοχής. Με λίγα λόγια, κλείνοντας, η Left υποστηρίζει σθεναρά το ταμείο όπως λειτουργεί σήμερα με κύριο στόχο την εξυπηρέτηση των ανθρώπων που βρίσκονται σε ευάλωτη θέση και συνεχίζουμε να συνεργαζόμαστε για να το κάνουμε αυτό πραγματικότητα.
Li Andersson
Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ.
Thank you very much. Are there any other members that wish to take the floor at this point? Mrs. de la Pisa Carrión.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Muchas gracias, presidente, señoría. Durante los últimos años hemos visto cómo la Comisión ha ido actuando en cada vez más áreas, como puede ser los asuntos sociales o la salud. Entendemos y ayudaríamos a que fuera así si no fuera porque este pretexto se hubiera utilizado a veces para entrometerse donde la Unión Europea no tiene competencias.
Más allá, a través de esta acción se tensionan y violentan las propias legislaciones nacionales. Este es el caso del pretexto de la salud para utilizarlo al amparar y financiar lo que se llaman derechos sexuales y reproductivos, es decir, el aborto. Las legislaciones nacionales son muy diferentes entre estados y pretenden ofrecer alternativas, pretender ofrecer alternativas es una falta de fidelidad de la Comisión hacia los Estados miembros y también hacia los ciudadanos que no quieren ver que sus aportaciones tienen este destino. El aborto no es un servicio de salud y la acción social debería ir orientada en dar soporte a la mujer embarazada para que pueda ser madre en las mejores condiciones.
Sabemos que la falta de apoyo emocional, la discriminación laboral o las malas condiciones económicas son factores determinantes. Sin embargo, no vemos propuestas con esta inquietud. Toda vida debe ser acogida y protegida. Debemos preocuparnos por los bajos índices de natalidad que tenemos ahora mismo en Europa. Muchas gracias.
Li Andersson
I have no further requests for the floor at this point, so I will give the floor to the Commission representative, Mrs. Passarman, for the next three minutes.
Katarina PASSARMAN
Thank you. I just I wanted to thank the the European Parliament and you in particular for this very close analysis of the our proposal for the ESF regulation and the and the many amendments that aim to improve it.
Now, as you know, in the European Commission proposal includes the, let's say, the money is actually in the national in the NRPP regulation. And the provision is that 14% of all of the overall NRPP, excluding the funding for direct support for farmers and the Social Climate Fund, are for social affairs and basically what the current ESF is financing.
And we believe that the 14% of the amount that we have proposed corresponds to more or less the amount that the ESF has available now. So that is where, that is to answer the first point on the issue of whether of having a separate money or not. Now the fund itself is linked to the NRPP regulation for a series of common rules. We want to have common rules. Even in the past we wanted to have common rules.
That's why we had the CPR, the Common Provision Regulation, which applies to ESF, ERDF, CF, etc.
So the NRPP is in a way going one step further compared to what we had in the period 21-27, but it's not a complete revolution from this point of view. As you know, one of the points, the principal points that the Commission had in mind in putting together this different proposal is flexibility. But flexibility for everybody. I mean, from the point of view of the Commission throughout the seven years to be able to adapt and to take into account emerging crises. This is based on the experience that we had in the past five years, seven years, which have been a continuous trying to recalibrate because to address the different crises that we faced.
And on the other hand, also for Member States that and regions that they don't have to all invest in exactly the same things if they don't have a problem in that area. And that is why also we are not so much in favor of earmarking, so, you know, reserved amount for for material deprivation or for gender equality or for youth unemployment, whatever it is. Because the logic is indeed that the Commission will negotiate bilaterally with the regions and with the Member States and will identify they will be identifying together what are the main problems and that is where the majority, you know, there can be a concentration of funding.
So this is to explain once again the logic of our proposals.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. I will give the floor back to the co-rapporteurs for final remarks, starting with Mr. Radtke.
Dennis Radtke
I'm pleased that there are aspects which have already received support from colleagues. For us, it is important to have a strong position that delivers investments where they matter the most, like having guaranteed investments for young people who are the future of our workforce, like fighting social exclusion and like supporting the child guarantee.
In other words, we need to move from the empty shell that the Commission proposed. The ESF has done enormous good in our societies and I believe we can work together to ensure that it can continue to do so in the next MFF. Thank you.
Marit Maij
Yes, thank you very much, Chair. Thank you also for the colleagues for their interventions. I think it's clear, like my colleague also said, that what we want is a European Social Fund that works in a similar way as the current European Social Fund, that helps people in vulnerable positions, that help, that support people that have a distance to the labor market to get them back on that labor market.
I think we also see that there is a need for clear objectives and clear targets within the ESF to ensure that Member States dedicate funding to specific aims. We know that if we don't have those clear objectives, Member States do not do that, they use that freedom. So here I think we have a different opinion than was stated also by the Commission. And naturally there will still be some space for Member States to dedicate non-earmarked funding for priorities that they want to have. But we need to make sure that the European Social Fund invests in people, that there's equal access to opportunities no matter what your background is.
And I think it's really good that we have so many amendments that help us to bring it closer in this direction. I think it's also again important to stress that we need a budget which is a full budget, that we need to make sure that it's not just a standalone European Social Fund, but it's also a European Social Fund with substantial funding. And it's still very difficult to get good grip on what the Commission is proposing on the funding, so we want to make sure that we have a clear funding on the European Social Fund. We're looking forward, I think, together with with David, but also with the other colleagues and the and the shadows on the negotiations, and I think we can we can start working at the end of this week. Thank you so much.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, and thank you all who participated in this discussion. So the rapporteurs will now work with the shadow rapporteurs to find a compromise text, with a vote on the final report scheduled for the November for the month of November in EMPL.
All right, we will continue with the next item on the agenda. And I'm very happy to welcome you to today's exchange of views with the Commission on the Commission's first ever strategy on intergenerational fairness, adopted on the 6th of March 2026. I believe most of my colleagues here in the committee will agree that this is a timely and important discussion, as intergenerational fairness is not only about solidarity between different age groups, but also about ensuring that Europe's social and economic model remains credible and sustainable for everyone today and in the future, and also for everyone to have trust in this model.
The choices that we make on employment, social protection, housing, skills, and public investment shape opportunities across generations. For us here in the EMPL committee, this debate goes to the heart of our work about creating quality jobs, reducing inequalities, supporting inclusion, and ensuring that both younger and older generations participate fully in society and in the labour market. We're looking forward to hearing more about the Commission's approach, and in particular how the proposed actions could strengthen fairness and opportunity across generations. So I will start by giving the floor to the European Commission, to Bilyana Sirakova, who is Deputy Head of Unit for Youth and Intergenerational Fairness. So Mrs. Sirakova, you have the floor for the next eight minutes.
Biliana SIRAKOVA
Thank you very much, Chair. Dear honourable members, indeed, about three months ago the Commission adopted the first-ever EU-level policy document framing the concept of intergenerational fairness.
And this strategy was developed under the political leadership of Glenn Micallef, the first-ever Commissioner on intergenerational fairness. Then since 16th of May, this topic is also visible on the organizational chart of the Directorate-General for Education, Culture, Youth and Sport, indeed with this unit on youth and intergenerational fairness. So it's my pleasure to present to you the strategy and our intentions in institutionalizing this concept and mainstreaming it. So I'm happy to start with the presentation, which will cover what the concept is about.
Then I will talk briefly about why we need this strategy now, how it was developed, focusing on some of the actions of the strategy and how we are integrating it in other policy fields, and then finalize with a few words on communication. So the concept of intergenerational fairness, we now know after almost a year-long scoping process, is about a lens for policy making. Intergenerational fairness, we do not think it's a new policy field, it's rather a principle that it needs to be applied horizontally across the board.
So we understand intergenerational fairness in two dimensions. One is fairness between young and old people today. So like the chair referred, this is about really intergenerational solidarity between different age groups already today. But the second temporal dimension is fairness between generations in the present, all of us, and generations which may not even be born yet, future generations. So intergenerational fairness is really about ensuring that decisions taken today do no harm to future generations and at the same time that there is increased engagement and solidarity between people of different ages already today.
The concept is abstract. However, we understand it's very well understood by citizens. Fairness, here intergenerational fairness, is about perceptions as thus it may be difficult to measure.
And while it may be abstract, people have great intuition about what it's about. We gave a task to the 150 European citizens who were randomly selected to take part in the European Citizens' Panel on Intergenerational Fairness. And here are just three examples. So these citizens were asked to bring an object from home which represents for them intergenerational fairness. And you can see that, for example, this young woman brought a photo of a tree, reminiscing about how this tree will bear fruits in the future if it's planted now.
You see the symbol of the olive branch bringing peace to different generations, better understanding and respect. And then glasses from four generations that unite us all across time and help us understand that solidarity is about looking through the views of and through the eyes of others.
So these objects that the 150 citizens presented were collected and their stories are available in a booklet which is now made public. So this was one of the first, let's say, communication tool that aims to raise awareness on this topic which is already published. A few words about why we need a strategy now. Globally this topic is gaining momentum. At the 2024 Summit of the Future at the UN level, all EU member states endorsed the Pact for the Future and the Declaration for Future Generations.
Intergenerational fairness is already mentioned in about a third of the constitutions of EU member states and many are looking for ways to institutionalize it, to create different structures that support it. So there is really a growing awareness of the need to address the needs of future generations.
Secondly, there is consensus that a series of these megatrends, for example, climate change, environmental degradation, also technological change, changing nature of work, urbanization, etc., demographic change, are widening inequalities and they're reshaping the opportunities for current and future generations. In addition, we know that the cost of non-action is considerable. Some estimates lead to the fact that climate change alone may be costing the EU a reduction of at least 7% of its gross domestic product by the end of the century. And it's important to say that this cost of non-action is not only economic, but it's also democratic and societal.
Addressing the needs and aspirations of all generations is also crucial for creating trust in public institutions and for social cohesion. So, as demonstrated by this quote from the Commission President, there is an increased sense that young people and future generations really deserve action on intergenerational fairness and that reconciling climate protection with a prosperous economy is a matter of competitiveness, but also a matter of intergenerational fairness. How was this strategy developed?
It was developed in a wide-scale citizen and stakeholder consultation process led by the Joint Research Centre and the EU Policy Lab. We had a number of targeted consultations especially with children and young people and youth civil society and as mentioned we had the the European Citizen Panel. Of course internally in the Commission we had important cross-departmental work and based on an inter-service group because this topic as mentioned is really cross-sectoral.
So now going into the strategy itself. With this strategy, we are aiming to reinforce long-term thinking and amplify youth voices as well as reuniting generations across shared goals for a better future. And we are proposing new foundations for fairness, a promise which we call a new intergenerational contract, which is based on three main foundations: fair policy-making, fair opportunities, and fair places.
These actions that we have in the strategy, 15 in total, I'll touch briefly upon a few of them, not going into too many details. But fair policy making is really reinforcing long-term thinking in our institutions, in our decision-making processes, and we aim to support this process with several tools. For example, multi-lingual future-oriented policy making will help develop futures literacy in public administrations across the EU. We're working with the UN Beyond Lab on developing a futures-balanced AI-enabled tool, which will facilitate forward-looking policy analysis.
Then one specific tool that we already have in place, but we aim to really reinforce and systematically apply, is the Commission Youth Check, which is a type of youth impact assessment where we try to ensure that the initiatives we come up with really take into account the long-term consequences, specifically on young people. And maybe a final example to mention is the longevity roadmap, which is planned for next year, for quarter two of 2027, which will be developed by the Joint Research Center. And this will be a mapping of age-specific policy issues for all age groups.
In fair opportunities, we are aiming to unite generations around shared goals for a better future. He will support this with the new intergenerational fairness index, which is to be launched still this year. And this index, while it will not monitor the state of intergenerational fairness, it will help us pinpoint different gaps that exist. What is specifically interesting in this index that it will help us make some comparisons between the situations of young people today and the opportunities that they had in the past. We know that in certain areas young people are better off today, for example, educational opportunities, mobility, but there are certainly too many areas, specifically housing, their mental health state and others, where young people today will actually have worse outcomes than their parents.
So this is what this index will try to pinpoint and it will be available as a start also at the national level with the prospects of potentially going down to the regional level. In addition, we are aiming to strengthen this intergenerational fairness dimension in sport and youth policy, specifically this will be done in the upcoming European sport model and the post-2027 EU youth strategy. Maybe one other action to mention is a day for intergenerational fairness, we aim to mark this day and raise awareness on this topic around 16th of November.
Finally, in the third dimension on fair places, we are recognizing that geography matters in shaping people's life chances and that opportunity should not depend on where someone is born. Here, one initiative that is forthcoming for the fall, for October this year, is the Voices of the Future initiative we are developing jointly with the Committee of the Regions. But we also aim to integrate intergenerational fairness in culture policy and in terms of communication campaigns, for instance, the 2026 mobility week will be dedicated to the theme of intergenerational fairness and mobility for all.
A few words on the governance and partnerships. So as mentioned, we are really creating, also trying to institutionalize this topic in the Commission. We will continue working in an inter-service coordination group with colleagues across the Commission from different departments and will build on existing networks such as the Commission's youth network where we have youth correspondents from all different Commission departments.
We have the strategic foresight network and the better regulation network. So we see these already existing frameworks as really helpful to continue work on this topic. In addition, we were partnering with stakeholders in different institutions. On 5th of May, Commissioner Mihailov held a round table with all of these key partners, which also contributed to the development of the strategy. And we look forward to continuing these partnerships with them and also with across institutions.
A few mentions on how we are integrating this topic. Well, some of them, there was the previous discussion was concerning them, but you can see some examples of the synergies between this topic and, for example, agricultural policy.
We, as mentioned, also we are trying to integrate it in the EU strategy and you can see some of the other examples here. Intergenerational fairness, at its foundations, it's about social fairness. So of course the European Social Fund and the national and regional partnership plans will be key for promoting this topic further. Another example in integration with research and innovation, this is already available on this website. What has been provided is a compilation of Horizon Europe projects which actually deliver on intergenerational fairness in a number of areas, for example, demography, health, environment, etc.
And this year we're also organizing a feedback to policy event where we will learn from these projects and how they have actually delivered on this topic. There are many other examples.
At the start of my presentation, as I said, this topic is not brand new. In a way, there are many initiatives that even if they don't explicitly mention this concept are delivering on this agenda. And in the box, you can see some of the considerations where we think are key for this work on intergenerational fairness. Finally, a few words on communication. All these resources and progress on the follow-up actions will be available on a dedicated webpage.
Recently we have launched the Dear Future Me campaign which is engaging especially with young people asking them about their hopes and aspirations for the future which they record in a in a video which is planned for publication in exactly two years' time. So while we have not seen these videos, we will do that in two years' time. We think it was a nice successful campaign to really raise awareness on this topic. The 16th of November I mentioned already and finally to maybe inform you that we are also developing a documentary on the citizens' experience in this panel on intergenerational fairness which will be available shortly. So thank you very much for for your attention.
I'm happy to answer your questions and hear your reactions. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much for this very interesting presentation. And we will now move to the group representatives. And we have from the EPP Mrs. Abadía Jover, please.
Maravillas Abadía Jover
I'm going to speak in Spanish. Gracias, presidenta. Estimados colegas, la estrategia europea sobre solidaridad intergeneracional llega en un momento clave. Europa no solo afronta una transición verde y digital, afronta también una profunda transición demográfica.
El envejecimiento de la población, la despoblación, la pérdida de talento en muchas regiones y la presión creciente sobre nuestro estado de bienestar nos obligan a pensar en largo plazo. Pero la solidaridad intergeneracional no puede entenderse como un debate entre jóvenes y mayores. No se trata de enfrentar a generaciones, sino de conectar sus necesidades. Por un lado, debemos garantizar la sostenibilidad de nuestro sistema de bienestar, de nuestras pensiones y de nuestros servicios públicos. Pero por otro, esa sostenibilidad solo será posible si los jóvenes de hoy tienen empleo de calidad, acceso a la vivienda, competencias adecuadas y oportunidades reales para construir su proyecto de vida.
Son en definitiva dos caras de la misma moneda. También debemos valorar el papel de todas las generaciones: los jóvenes que se incorporan al mercado laboral, las familias que necesitan estabilidad para planificar su futuro y los trabajadores de mayor edad que desean seguir contribuyendo con su experiencia.
La opinión votada esta mañana en este comité sobre la estrategia europea de la juventud recoge que la política juvenil no puede abordarse de forma aislada sino como parte de una estrategia más amplia de empleo, de productividad y de sostenibilidad social. Por ello me gustaría preguntar a la Comisión cómo garantizará que esta estrategia a nivel de los Estados miembros se traduzca en buenas prácticas que refuercen el empleo juvenil, la productividad y la sostenibilidad de nuestros sistemas de bienestar evitando una lógica de confrontación entre generaciones. Gracias.
Evelyn Regner
Yeah, micro works.
Thank you very much, chair. I will switch also into my mother tongue, into German. Ausdrücklichen Dank an die Kommission, dass sie dieses Thema aufgegriffen hat, und an den Kommissar Mikalev. Und ein ausdrückliches Dankeschön, dass in dieser Welt, in der die Gesellschaft immer segregierter ist, in der jeder in seiner eigenen Bubble lebt oder eben auch schwerer damit zurande kommt, in einer super individualisierten, selbstoptimierten Gesellschaft eine Strategie von der Kommission vorgelegt wird, wie wir hier auch gemeinsam große Probleme, insbesondere, und daher also dieses Lob an den Kommissar, das Problem der mentalen Gesundheit aufgegriffen wird und das große Problem der Einsamkeit, die entsteht, wenn Gruppen eben quasi sich selbst überlassen werden.
Sie hat dieses Thema aufgenommen und ist nun damit offiziell in der europäischen Politik angekommen. Einsamkeit ist ein großes, wichtiges Problem, für das es noch immer viel zu wenig politische Maßnahmen gibt, die getroffen werden.
Es trifft den Einzelnen, aber die Ursachen sind systemisch. Und diese Strategie verknüpft nun territoriale Lücken bei der Mobilität und der Versorgung mit der Einsamkeit. Und daher meine konkreten Fragen an die Kommission. Die Strategie ist nicht bindend. Welche konkreten Maßnahmen wird die Kommission nun vorschlagen?
Und was werden Sie mit den Empfehlungen tun, die das LONI-EU-Projekt bis Ende nächsten Jahres vorlegt? Sie haben insbesondere auch auf den Index aufmerksam gemacht. Wird die Einsamkeit ebenfalls mit aufgenommen werden? Und insbesondere auch das Thema AI und die Auswirkungen eben auf diese intergenerationale Lage, wie sie ausschaut, auf Einsamkeit, aber auch mentale Gesundheit, würde mich sehr interessieren, wie die Kommission dies ebenfalls in dieser Strategie aufnehmen wird.
Mélanie Disdier
Oui Madame la Présidente. L'Europe est un vieux continent qui s'est construit sur plusieurs siècles et plusieurs dizaines de générations successives. Face à l'écoulement inexorable du temps, nos ancêtres savaient qu'ils n'étaient que de passage et ont construit l'Europe non pas pour eux, mais pour ceux qui les suivraient.
Malheureusement aujourd'hui l'Europe s'est arrêtée se reposant sur ses acquis se fiant à l'élan de son passé festoyant sur le travail de ses aînés mais sans rien construire pour sa propre descendance. Notre continent autrefois tourné vers l'avenir ne vit désormais plus que pour son passé répondant aux crises par de vulgaires solutions bancales sans se soucier des conséquences sur le long terme. La construction européenne censée garantir notre avenir n'a finalement réussi à bâtir qu'un mur de normes servant d'œillères à ceux qui refusent de voir la vérité en face. Devant le déclin démographique du continent certains préfèrent financer leur train de vie par une immigration massive et par la dette plutôt que par des politiques natalistes garantissant notre avenir.
Voilà le vrai drame qui nous pousse aujourd'hui à nous interroger sur le sujet de l'équité intergénérationnelle. Alors ma question est simple, Monsieur le Commissaire. Est-ce que vous comptez enfin libérer notre jeunesse du fardeau réglementaire qui freine nos forces productives ? Avez-vous conscience que le meilleur moyen pour que nos aînés vivent bien est de laisser nos jeunes construire et investir dans leur propre avenir et donc dans l'avenir de l'Europe ? Ou à l'instar de ce que font la majorité des décideurs politiques européens, allez-vous entamer un énième projet d'ingénierie sociale juste bon à étouffer ce qu'il nous reste de dynamisme économique ?
Li Andersson
Je vous remercie.
Thank you. And from the ECR, Renew and Greens, I do not have anyone. The next speaker then is Mrs. Martins from the Left.
Catarina Martins
Obrigada, senhora presidente. Vou falar em português. O mercado funciona ao trimestre. E a justiça entre gerações exige planeamento a 30 anos ou bem mais. E acho estranho aqueles discursos que falam dos jovens como se os jovens fossem ser sempre jovens.
Quem é jovem agora será mais velho a seguir e, convenhamos, o problema de nenhum jovem é a pensão que o seu avô ou a sua avó recebe. É um absurdo. O problema dos jovens é a precariedade. E face às todas as ameaças e todas as transições, da inteligência artificial ao clima, há uma prioridade que garante a justiça ao longo da vida e entre gerações, e essa prioridade são os direitos no trabalho. Porque é o que permite planear a vida, é o que permite planear a vida, seja pessoal, familiar ou colectiva.
Se um jovem passa anos a saltar de contrato precário em contrato precário, como é que se emancipa? E como é que a segurança social se sustenta se os salários de entrada da jovem geração são cada vez mais baixos? Amanhã em Portugal vai haver uma greve geral que é de avós e netos. É uma verdadeira exigência de justiça geracional. Porque o governo português acaba de apresentar um conjunto de propostas de alteração às leis do trabalho que generalizam o outsourcing, alargam os contratos a prazo e violam mesmo as regras europeias para o trabalho em plataformas que está cada vez mais generalizado, como sabemos.
O governo português quer mesmo carimbar a instabilidade das novas gerações. E em Portugal os trabalhadores estão a fazer a sua parte com a greve geral. E seria importante perceber se a Comissão Europeia também vai fazer a sua, fazendo cumprir as diretivas europeias, nomeadamente sobre plataformas e travar este retrocesso. Obrigado.
Li Andersson
So, I will give the floor to the Commission in between, and then I have questions and members wanting to speak in the second round, but we'll have some reflections and answers from the Commission in between. So, please, Ms. Sirakova, the floor is yours.
Biliana SIRAKOVA
Thank you. Thank you for your reactions and questions. To start with the demographic question and also this which is happening in some cases where there's this rhetoric about pitting generations against each other. We have in the especially in the last years since COVID, you would agree, are experiencing a lot of polarization in our society.
So we think that there is really now an opportunity to combat that and actually try to reunite societies. This is why intergenerational solidarity, one of these two dimensions, is so key in the strategy. So we absolutely agree with this assessment that we have to appreciate what the different generations can bring to the table and seek these win-win opportunities for intergenerational cooperation, whether it's in intergenerational mentorship and knowledge transfer from maybe older people to younger people or other opportunities, for example, more innovative formats of intergenerational housing. There's so many opportunities where generations can work together for the benefit of all of them. So clearly, definitely this thinking is part of this strategy.
On the question of how we ensure that this strategy, while it cannot be mandatory, it's really followed up also at the Member State level. In the strategy, we already have included a number of very good practices that already exist across EU Member States, and we think there is an opportunity to really exchange and develop common knowledge and and share these good practices.
So what we will do, while of course we cannot make any of this mandatory, is rather provide the different tools which can be useful to a member state if they would like to continue working on this topic. As mentioned, for instance, this futures policy-making toolkit, the IGF index and others will be there for member states to use. So there seems to be interest already. I can say that as a follow-up to the strategy, a number of member states are starting discussions and we are happy to be part of this. So and then others are really developing innovative tools.
For example, just very recently, Italy has introduced a generational impact assessment. So others are following those steps as well. On the question by Mrs. Renier on loneliness, indeed this is one of these topics which is valid for both young people and old people for different reasons. For young people, maybe it's due to this hyperconnectivity and as others mentioned, the impact of technology and more and more time spent online rather than in in-person connections.
And for older people, for different reasons, maybe for elderly people who are living by themselves in isolated housing. And so this is one again of these opportunities where we can bring generations together for the benefit of that. And maybe in COVID, we did see some of these projects where young people were coming to to help elderly people in this very difficult time. So we see that this kind of situations brought hope and they are beneficial to both sides. On the questions about regulatory burden and helping young people invest in their own future, most of the youth initiatives that we have launched, especially as follow-up to the 2022 European Year of Youth, are really youth-led and have young people at the center.
So we definitely agree with this assessment that it should not be a top-down process, but we should actually empower young people to develop their own initiatives and learn in the process. The EU Youth Dialogue is actually one of the longest-standing youth participation instruments. It's happening since 2010 across the EU, and somewhere between 30 and 40,000 young people are consulted through this process. This is where they come up with recommendations that are ultimately then endorsed in the Council by ministers responsible for youth.
So we definitely want to prioritize these youth-led projects where young people are at the center and are leading the actions and being really agents of change. And on the final questions about AI and platform work, indeed, as mentioned, these are some of the megatrends that the 14 megatrends that the Commission is closely monitoring. And we know they're impacting opportunities for young people and might even worsen even further opportunities for future generations. So definitely agree with the need to follow up on this and the changing nature of work. There is actions there that are especially important not only for young people but older people who luckily are living longer lives, hopefully healthier longer lives, and many of them still want to stay in the workplace for longer years.
Marc Angel
Yes, thank you very much. I would also like to congratulate Commissioner Mikhailev and his teams for having prepared this and also for having included citizens. And indeed, it looks like a very conceptual, a very, yeah, very conceptual, but the citizens proved how that it is that it is and and my question, my first question is, I heard the Commission mentioning several times we are trying to institutionalize this this concept.
This is very good. I know on the side of the Council, there is the this formation of Ministers of the Future. They are trying also to institutionalize it in one way. And the Parliament has a role to play too. So I was wondering, this is all about foresight, that's the aim of it.
And there is national parliaments who have a Committee of the Future, which is very much concentrated on on foresight. So I was wondering if the Commission or if that also we as a Parliament have to do a reflection, maybe see in Member States who have a Committee of the Future, how they work and if this could be an idea also to have a Committee of the Future here in this Parliament.
And then I would like to come quickly back to what my colleague Evelyn already mentioned, loneliness, which is not only concerning elderly people but also all generations. So and we know that there is this great project Lonely EU, it's part of the Horizon Europe project. So my question to the concrete question now is what will the Commission do with the recommendation that this project will deliver, I think believe by the end of of next year.
Isabelle Le Callennec
Oui merci Madame la Présidente. Merci pour la réponse de la Commission sur cette question qui est très importante. Nous savons nous allons avoir à faire face à ce qu'on appelle un hiver démographique et cette question des liens intergénérationnels est absolument majeure. Moi j'aurais une question très simple en fait. Il y a de très bonnes intentions dans ce qui nous est proposé.
La question c'est quelle traduction concrète dans le budget 2028-2034 dans les plans nationaux et régionaux dans le FSE+ et dans le règlement performance.
On est en train de travailler sur ces sujets-là. On est plein de bonnes intentions, mais à un moment donné, il faudra effectivement qu'il y ait une traduction concrète dans ces textes qui se préparent et notamment dans le budget. Tout n'est pas question d'argent, mais à un moment donné quand même, c'est important. Merci.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Gracias, presidente. Gracias a nuestra invitada de la Comisión, señorías. Cuesta entender que hablemos de una estrategia intergeneracional sin mencionar a la entidad donde todas las generaciones se encuentran.
Más allá, donde las diferentes generaciones comparten inquietudes porque conviven como una unidad y se apoyan entre sí, que es la familia. Justo es la desconfiguración de la familia la causa de muchos de los desafíos actuales. Preocupa mucho que se trate este tema enfrentando a generaciones, como si los intereses de unos no estuvieran conectados con los otros. La acción, la mejor acción social es la orientada a apoyar a la familia, a reconocerles su prestigio y su papel esencial. Pues de forma natural proporciona el ambiente más beneficioso desde el punto de vista afectivo, económico y de salud.
¿Por qué tratamos de ignorar los vínculos nacionales entre los miembros de una familia? La familia es insustituible. Sabemos que quien vive en un ambiente apropiado de estabilidad y afecto se enfrenta a menos dificultades, desde la infancia a la vejez. De hecho, quien recibe este amor luego puede también devolverlo hacia fuera con mayor compromiso hacia su comunidad. La familia es un factor humanizador, donde los cuidados y la compañía, hemos hablado hoy de la soledad, ocurren de forma desinteresada y natural.
No hay una estructura artificial sostenible ni eficaz que pueda reemplazarla. Me gustaría preguntar a la Comisión cómo se entiende la familia dentro de esta estrategia. Creo que en la intervención no la ha mencionado, o sea, que en su intervención no ha habido pero ni una vez ha sido mencionada la palabra familia. Es por eso mi inquietud. Muchas gracias.
Raquel GOMES
Muito obrigada, vou falar em português. Bom, antes de mais, naturalmente que quero agradecer à Comissão a proposta que nos traz aqui. Mas devo confessar uma coisa, é que quando vi a proposta da Comissão Europeia relativamente ao FSE, sinceramente fiquei muito preocupada, porque a redução assustou-me de facto e deixou-me, digamos, muito seriamente preocupada quanto àquilo que íamos fazer.
Mas há aqui uma área que me preocupa muitíssimo e que tem a ver com os milhões de pobres que temos. Há alguma forma específica de, nesta estratégia intergeracional, do olhar para estes pobres? É preciso não esquecer que nós tínhamos assumido a responsabilidade de, digamos, retirar 15 milhões de pessoas da pobreza até 2030. Até à data tirámos mais ou menos metade. Como é que vamos incluir estas pessoas neste projeto intergeracional?
Porque não é a mesma coisa do que uma pessoa que está integrada no seu trabalho, que participa no dia a dia. E falamos muito em jovens, então falemos da pobreza, de pessoas que de facto estão em situação de pobreza e sobre as quais temos uma responsabilidade enorme e que eu acho que vale a pena e temos mesmo que apostar fortemente.
Idoia Mendia
Thank you, chair. I will speak in Spanish. Valoramos la estrategia como un paso importante en la buena dirección, eso es un hecho, y es positivo además que reconozca elementos clave vinculados al envejecimiento como todo lo relacionado con el mercado laboral, los sistemas de cuidados o la discriminación que se sufre por edad. Pero creemos que todavía falta una visión más transversal y completa sobre el envejecimiento. Y por eso quiero plantear dos preguntas: una sobre la discriminación por edad y la otra vinculada al índice intergeneracional que lleva la estrategia.
Primero, sobre la lucha contra la discriminación por edad, la Comisión anunció un compendio de buenas prácticas sobre esta cuestión concreta, la discriminación por edad, pero ¿cómo se definirán y medirán esas buenas prácticas?
Y teniendo en cuenta que un estudio de la propia Comisión publicado este mismo año dice que el 50% de los europeos siente que ha tenido discriminación por edad en el mercado laboral, ¿prevén ustedes medidas más concretas para combatir el edadismo? Y segunda pregunta sobre el índice intergeneracional, ¿cómo se asegurará la Comisión de que esta herramienta no refuerce un enfoque fragmentado del envejecimiento, sino que contribuya realmente a una estrategia integral y coherente?
Porque de toda la estrategia, a mí lo más sensible me parece este índice intergeneracional. Muchas gracias.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And just a short final question on my behalf, because you might have mentioned it, but I didn't catch it. So on the index, how and where will it be used? And what will be the relationship, say, between that index and the indicators that are used in the social scoreboard and the semester process?
So, floor back to Mrs. Sirakova.
Biliana SIRAKOVA
Thank you very much. Let me start in the in the order, so on the first question by MEP Angel on institutionalization. Indeed, we have good examples. We mentioned in the strategy particularly the parliamentary committee on future generations in Finland. And this is a good practice we believe, and we are not aware of many other ongoing attempts to to do that, but we think it's something that is important.
We know that when citizens care about action in this area, they look to both their governments, but also national parliaments and of course actors at the EU level. So this is something that would make sense. In terms of the project, I'm sorry I'm not familiar with the specific project. There were quite many of these Horizon EU projects. But what we are planning in the second half of the year is a feedback to policy event where we invite project participants.
But this is our RTD, DG RTD in the Commission in the lead. And the attempt is to learn from these projects and provide input back to policy. So maybe we will check what this project is about. Another one that we are thinking of inviting is the MAPINEQ project, which is about mapping inequalities and the link between education and life outcomes and inequalities later in the life. So this is one that is very good.
On the question from about families, indeed, the family setting is probably the first place where intergenerational contact and where relationships are developed. And we know, and this is linked to then the other questions about poverty, that the conditions for children, especially in their early life, are really shaping their outcomes forever. A child that grows in poverty becomes a young person in poverty and adult in poverty. This is the most likely scenario. So this conditions in the early life and the family settings are especially important, absolutely.
Something that this intergenerational fairness concept brings is this life course approach, this understanding that the young people of today are the old people of tomorrow. And so when we're thinking of opportunities, we kind of keep this longer term and life course approach in mind. So this is the unique really lens that this concept brings to policy making.
On age discrimination, indeed one of the specific actions that we have in the strategy is a compendium of good practices. Age discrimination is something that both young people and older people face, even if it's much more predominant for older people. The the survey that we published in November of 2025 mapping different actions and really understanding what are the barriers to addressing age discrimination suggests that this is most prevalent actually in employment settings and secondly in the health sector, in the health sector especially for older people.
And what we hope this good practices compendium will help us tackle is good practices linked to the barriers of addressing age discrimination, which are both institutional but also interpersonal and then sometimes something which is called even like self-inflicted where people who are discriminated against really internalize this thing and then behave in life accordingly. So this good practices will hopefully select examples from across member states which have been successful in addressing the barriers to anti-discrimination.
The index, so the index as mentioned is not going to be a monitoring tool, but it rather will compile already existing data from many different sources, very valid data that is coming including from national statistical offices around the EU. And so the colleagues in the Joint Research Centre who have developed this index have selected different indicators where we have data and which pinpoint to this intergenerational dimension. So some indicators, there are around 60 different ones. Let's say in the education it will be different targets that we already have, for example early school leavers.
We have indicators linked to social fairness, to health and many others. So indeed, it is already existing data. It's not a brand new that will be just compiled, leading to just a better understanding on intergenerational fairness. The index was developed with input from across the Commission, from all the different services in charge of this area. It will be an interactive tool, actually publicly available.
And again, it will be launched still this year. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And this brings us to the end of I think this very interesting exchange of views with the Commission. So thank you very much for also for the clear and enlightening answers. And thank you to all speakers and colleagues for active participation. We then move on to the next point on the agenda, which is the mid-term review of the 2021 action plan for social economy.
The social economy is a key sector and accounts for over 6% of total employment. And numbers show that massive progress has been made in terms of public investment and many Member States are adopting strategies or even changing their legal frameworks to accommodate the social economy. We have invited the Commission today to give us an insight on the way forward and how to further improve this successful strategy.
Redner 40
So we will start by giving the floor to Mrs. Passerman for the next eight minutes.
Katarina PASSARMAN
Voilà. Thank you very much, Chair, for this introduction. Indeed, so I will give you a short presentation of where we stand on the Social Economy Action Plan of 2021.
First of all, perhaps what do we mean by social economy? Like you rightly said, there are now 6.3% of total EU employment is in social economy, which means in 4.3 million associations, cooperatives, mutual benefit societies, foundations and social enterprises for a total of 11 and a half million jobs. But what is also interesting that you should have clear in mind is that the social economy is in many sectors. It is not only for some sectors. The organizations dealing with it operate in care, in finance, in agri-food, in retail, in culture, in energy, in housing, you know, many others as well.
So it's really not a niche, it's a structural part of the European economy. Now, if we just to start with my presentation, I also want to highlight that all of these associations as well as the institutions, the member states, you, us, have been involved in the deciding, I mean, in setting up the social economy action plan in 2021 and also in the reflection of what we should do at the mid-term now.
So I also want to thank all of you for it. Now when we, the action plan was adopted in 2021 and we had, we set a roadmap for 10 years. We wanted, what we said is that we want an economy, we want a social economy with the right framework to thrive, a social economy that is financed and supported, and a social economy that is visible and acknowledged. Now a lot has changed since 2021. When we, when this came out, it was just after COVID where we had a very clear vision that of the resilience of the social economy sector at the local level in this phase of, you know, local difficulties.
But now, since then, we've had lots of other crises on energy, the inflation, housing costs, the war at the borders of Europe. And now the priority seems to be different. It's not anymore about resilience at the local level, but it's about competitiveness and how we can, you know, make sure that Europe remains the best place to be in the, to live in the world. So here the social economy can also be very visible. And this is where we want to look forward.
As the mid-term review's goal was to take stock with what had been done, what worked and what did not, and also to set the direction for the coming years, also with this changed environment. Now, if I look at what I want to highlight of what was done, so the taking stock of what has been done in these five years, I think the most important thing is that for the first time we have a Council recommendation setting framework conditions for the social economy.
This is a common framework for Member States. You have to understand that when I say that the 6.3% of people in employment work for the social economy, this is more than 10% in Spain, but less than 1% in some other countries. So our goal is really to lift for all the countries at the level of those where social economy is more around. And to get that, it is important that there are important framework conditions, which is why this recommendation of 2023 is key to move forward. And I have to say that there are now 21 Member States which have either updated or put in place such a recommendation.
So we are very happy about that. In 24 Letta, the Letta report also mentioned, called for the importance of social economy and it should be better integrated in the European project. In 2025, for the first time, we had a special Eurobarometer on the social economy, which is important because it sets the benchmark, let's say, the floor for public awareness of what we mean when we're talking about social economy. And we were, have to say, pleasantly surprised by the results. And so now we have to look and how to go forward.
Now, so in the past we had, I don't want to go through all the actions of the action plan.
There were 63 and the majority are completed or ongoing. We have invested 1.6 billion through the cohesion funds, so this was choice of the member states. Via InvestEU, we gave guarantees up to 1.2 billion, which are leading to 11.7 billion amount in investment. As I said before, we have 21 member states which have adopted or are preparing social economy strategies also on the basis of the Council recommendations.
I mean, in some cases it's updated of strategies that existed before, but it is important that the social economy action plan is really a key reference for national policies at the moment. And it has, the social economy action plan has generated positive spillovers and there is a real momentum on it in all the areas that it covered: the framework conditions, the business opportunities and the recognition of social economy. But of course, there are still a lot of variation between Member States and what we understand is that for measures to be really effective, we need at the same time political commitment, mature ecosystems, coordinated governance and the use of instruments.
And the four together bring real progress on the ground. Now for the future, because the document, the mid-term review, was taking stock but also looking at the future. And for the future, we have three strands, if you want. We're looking at that we want a competitive social economy, an economy that operates on a level playing field with other economic actors across the single market. And to achieve this, we think that we are working specifically on two actions, also on others, but I summarize.
One is to promote, explore the opportunities to promote socially responsible public procurement and include guidance on their implementation. This is part of the work that the Commission is already done on reviewing the public procurement directives and also linked with work that the Commission is already doing on the reviewing the general block exemption regulation for state aid. Also there we're looking to clarify the rules for social economy enterprises. So this is the first strand.
The second strand is a robust social economy so that it can have access to finance adapted to its needs, with talent and an organizational capacity that allows these enterprises to grow and to innovate. And this ambition is now reflected through a growing number of EU initiatives, but in particular I want to mention that we will explore a voluntary market-led framework of investable objectives supported by outcome models and indicators, and we will be doing this together with the OECD. And last but not least, we also want, as I already mentioned before for the past, it continues that we need to have a recognized and visible social economy, that people know what we're talking about and understand that the social economy is across all sectors and can be embedded across all sectors on a level playing field with let's say normal businesses.
And here, what we are considering at the moment is really to actually improve the data collection. We're working with Eurostat, we're working with developing satellite accounts which would allow us to really benchmark and have, you know, have national data also in the long run, not each time just with a like an ad hoc connection that it becomes a structural issue.
So this is basically what we are doing with the current proposal, I mean with the with this report. We're going to continue working on the actions that we had in before, but as I said they're mostly complete and we are adding these few actions which we think will be important. This is the main point that we wanted to that I wanted to focus on. We of course would like also to work with you, with the European Parliament as well as with the other EU institutions and with the member states in order to maximize the potential of this agenda and that we can really mainstream the social economy, that it should be really a transformation of the policy, economics, finance and culture at all levels. So let me just conclude by reporting a quote from the report.
By unlocking the full power of the social economy, we can shape a Europe that puts communities and the planet at its heart, paving the way for a fairer, more sustainable and competitive future.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. We then invite the group representatives to take the floor, starting with Mrs. Al-Sahlani from the EPP.
Maravillas Abadía Jover
I will speak Spanish. Gracias, presidenta, estimados colegas, esta revisión intermedia del plan de acción de economía social deja un mensaje claro: Europa ha avanzado, pero ahora toca pasar del reconocimiento a la integración real. Este sector, como ha señalado la Comisión, representa a 4,3 millones de organizaciones y cerca de 11,5 millones de empleos en la Unión Europea. No es un sector marginal, es una realidad económica que contribuye al empleo, a la cohesión territorial y también a la competitividad europea.
Esta revisión reconoce avances importantes, pero también señala retos que siguen pendientes: dificultades de acceso a la financiación, barreras regulatorias y necesidad de una gobernanza más fuerte entre todos los niveles, una que permita que las políticas europeas lleguen al territorio. Además, si queremos que la economía social sea verdaderamente parte de la competitividad europea, debe estar también conectada con las políticas de mercado interior, de industria y de innovación; no puede quedar limitada únicamente a la agenda social. Precisamente por eso, una de las claves de esta nueva etapa debe ser reforzar la conexión entre las políticas europeas y su aplicación sobre el terreno.
He recibido este mensaje de Östersund en Suecia, en un encuentro con ciudades, regiones y entidades de economía social. Las mejores soluciones no siempre nacen de las grandes declaraciones, sino de alianzas conectadas con el territorio. La economía social crece en municipios, en regiones, junto a entidades de economía social que conocen las necesidades reales de sus comunidades. Por eso, el próximo presupuesto europeo va a ser decisivo. Si queremos que la economía social despliegue todo su potencial, debe tener un lugar claro en los instrumentos financieros, como tanto en los fondos de cohesión como en el fondo de competitividad.
Por eso mi pregunta es cómo va a garantizar la Comisión que las conclusiones de esta revisión intermedia no queden en un marco declarativo, sino que se traduzcan en financiación accesible, en menos barreras y en una presencia real de la economía social en el próximo presupuesto.
Idoia Mendia
Thank you, Chair. Bueno, podremos decir que la primera parte de la implementación de este plan de acción ha supuesto importantes avances para el ecosistema de la economía social.
Y entre ellos yo destacaría el establecimiento de por primera vez de una definición de lo que es economía social creando un marco común para toda la Unión Europea aunque también tengo que reconocer que nos queda mucho camino por recorrer para tener entre todos una mirada común sobre qué es la economía social. Por otro lado también lo ha mencionado usted la recomendación del Consejo a mí me parece que es otro de los grandes hitos que nos ha permitido y nos permite tener ya a numerosos estados miembros con legislación aprobada renovada o están en proceso de hacer leyes que regulen la economía social en sus países.
También se ha mejorado mucho un aspecto fundamental para el éxito de las de la economía social que es la financiación de de los actores en la economía social, aunque yo creo que todavía queda margen para poder seguir progresando en ese campo tan fundamental, aunque reconozco que en estos últimos cinco años se han hecho grandes grandes avances. También hay que destacar las nuevas iniciativas anunciadas por la Comisión para en este mid-term review como el Progress Tracker o el toolkit para políticas locales y regionales de economía social y la intención de fomentar más adquisiciones por parte de los trabajadores de empresas.
Pero yo sí que me gustaría señalar algunos aspectos que necesitan un mayor esfuerzo para implementarse y mejorar la economía social, como es restablecer los vínculos entre el ecosistema industrial y las políticas industriales de la Unión Europea. Tiene que haber una conexión entre la DG GROW y la DG EMPL, porque así lo pide el sector, y me gustaría saber cómo lo van a mejorar. La economía social no es algo agrícola o vinculado al tercer sector, la economía social es industria. Yo lo sé muy bien, vengo de una región, Euskadi, donde Mondragón compite a nivel mundial con proyectos industriales de primera división. Y otra preocupación también es cómo va a afectar en negativo a la economía social el nuevo marco financiero y, sobre todo, que siga sin reconocerse la contribución que la economía social hace a la competitividad y a la industria.
Y por último, y ya con esto acabo, y me gustaría si fuera posible que me respondiera, nos preocupa la ausencia de herramientas concretas para elaborar la próxima generación de políticas de economía social post 2030. Tenemos que seguir siempre mirando más allá. Y muchas gracias por todas sus explicaciones.
Li Andersson
Thank you. Next speaker is Mrs. De La Pisa Carrión from the Patriots.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Gracias, presidente. Señor invitado, gracias, señorías. España tiene actualmente 22 millones de personas en activo. Por lo tanto, la economía social equivaldría aproximadamente a 1,3 millones de empleos.
Recibimos millones de euros para la economía social. ¿Puede la Comisión explicar qué resultados tangibles se han obtenido del uso de estos fondos? ¿Cómo se evita que acaben financiando solamente redes subvencionadas o incluso redes de corrupción del gobierno de Sánchez, cuya prioridad no ha sido dar respuesta a los problemas reales de los españoles, que siguen sin poder acceder a una vivienda, los jóvenes no pueden emanciparse y el paro continúa entre los más altos de Europa? También vemos entidades como las mutualidades, que son entidades de la economía social que en este momento se enfrentan a graves problemas sin poder ofrecer los servicios y prestaciones que los socios deberían tener garantizadas por haber aportado a lo largo de su vida.
Hoy abogados y procuradores se encuentran en una situación muy delicada e injusta y están haciendo huelgas justo contra el gobierno. ¿Está la Comisión al corriente de esta realidad? ¿Tiene la Unión Europea previsión de ayudar a estas mutualidades, especialmente a las españolas? Gracias.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And you really notice the importance of the social economy for Spain because only now do we have the first speaker who is not from Spain. And that is Mr. Arvanitis representing the Left group.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ κυρία Πρόεδρε. Αδιαπραγμάτευτα έχουν γίνει βήματα και αδιαπραγμάτευτα η κοινωνική οικονομία αποτελεί ένα κρίσιμο πυλώνα της κοινωνικής συνοχής. Βεβαίως βλέπουμε ότι υπάρχει πρόοδος από το 21 μέχρι σήμερα. Εγώ θα βάλω δύο τρία θέματα για να γίνω και εγώ χρήσιμος σε αυτή την κουβέντα και να με βοηθήσετε. Η ενδιάμεση αξιολόγηση της Κομισιόν αναδεικνύει ουσιαστικές προκλήσεις αλλά υπάρχουν πληγές ανοιχτές.
Προβλήματα θα έλεγα. Η άνιση πρόσβαση στη χρηματοδότηση. Η περιορισμένη πρόσβαση στις αγορές. Η ελλιπής θεσμική στήριξη σε αρκετά κράτη μέλη, όπως στη δική μου χώρα, κυρία Πρόεδρε, αλλά και σημαντικά κενά σε επίπεδο δεδομένων και αναγνώρισης του τομέα. Εδώ λοιπόν θα θέσω δύο ερωτήματα.
Τρία ερωτήματα μικρά. Πώς διασφαλίζουμε ότι η αυξανόμενη έμφαση στην ανταγωνιστικότητα δεν θα αλλοιώσει τον κοινωνικό χαρακτήρα και την αποστολή της κοινωνικής οικονομίας; Βεβαίως κατανοώ ότι οι δράσεις αυτές πρέπει να είναι και βιώσιμες. Πρέπει να βρούμε λοιπόν ακριβώς τη συνταγή. Δεύτερο, πώς σκοπεύει η Επιτροπή να στηρίξει στην πράξη μικρότερους φορείς, συνεταιρισμούς, τοπικές πρωτοβουλίες, ιδιαίτερα σε αγροτικές και περιφερειακές περιοχές, ώστε να μην γιγαντωθούν περαιτέρω οι ανισότητες;
Ξέρετε, στη χώρα μου είναι πολύ δύσκολο να ζεις, ειδικά στην περιφέρεια.
Και ένα τρίτο μικρό, πώς διασφαλίζεται ότι ενισχύεται ως εναλλακτικό μοντέλο και κοινωνικά προσανατολισμένο ένα οικονομικό μοντέλο με αξιοπρεπείς θέσεις εργασίας και κοινωνικά δικαιώματα; Ευχαριστώ πολύ, κυρία Πρόεδρε.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, and are there other members who wish to take the floor?
I have first Mr. Angel.
Marc Angel
Oops. A lot of Spanish colleagues spoke because Spain is really champion in social economy and also the Commission underlined that. And I remember we had a wonderful mission to Spain with this committee in the last mandate. And there was one thing which impressed me the most and I think this could be a practice in many member states because we have a lot of SMEs who could turn into a social economy because when the owner, the owner has no children, small enterprises where there is no successors to take over the enterprises, often the enterprises die and the staff are being laid off and unemployed.
And in Spain there is certain regions who have a law where the where the where the the local government gives the for the banks the guarantees the loans so that the company can can turn into a cooperative and survive and the workers take over. And I think that's a fantastic model. And in my member state we have a lot of small enterprises who die because there is no nobody who takes over the company, but the company worked and and the people were there. So I think this is a wonderful example.
But now my question is also about social economy and startups. There's a lot of startups and people who create startups who are not interested in shareholder value, but more into the social and environmental dimension of what they're doing. And do we have enough startup accelerator or incubation programs in Europe? Is this something the action plan in the future could concentrate on? Thank you very much.
Branislav Ondruš
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Yes, I want to confirm that social economy is important for every European member state, including Eastern European, even if I must say that this importance is not recognized properly yet in many Eastern European countries.
However, regarding to the midterm review, the first my remark is focused on public procurement. What I'm missing in midterm review is something like a clear pledge of the Commission to improve social economy, the position of social economy entities and support of social economy entities in the revision of public procurement legislation, which is now drafted and the Commission and is to come, probably it will be published in next weeks, I hope, as it was announced by the Commission.
So what I would like to see in in the midterm review of social economy action plan is clear pledge that the Commission will take into consideration the importance of public procurement and incentives under the public procurement for further development of social economy. And my second question second point is just to not repeat but underline as already colleagues mentioned the the preparation of draft of new MFF.
I must say that draft of new MFF and especially the draft of NRPPs legislation shows that unfortunately in my view European Commission let's say doesn't take into consideration the importance of social economy for improvement of European competitiveness. So I would like to see also in this Commission's document clear message sent to us and to European public that MFF will take into consideration the importance of social economy for the improvement of European economy's competitiveness and that the MFF will allocate proper funds to improve through the development of social economy.
Thanks.
Raquel GOMES
Muito obrigada, senhora presidente. Eu queria só dar aqui um exemplo interessante e também apelar para que esta área seja vista como...
Sorry, I'm speaking Portuguese. A criação de startups ou incubadoras de empresas é importantíssima porque começam por se associar duas ou três pessoas para trabalharem numa determinada área. Naturalmente, nessa incubadora ou nessa startup trabalham até estarem prontos para sair para o exterior. E quando saem para o exterior são eles próprios que já dão trabalho a outros cidadãos. Portanto, ampliam o número de cidadãos que trabalham nesse tipo de economia.
Mas se não houver estas primeiras portas que se abrem, se não houver um espaço de coworking, se não houver um espaço de startup para eles começarem a pôr, digamos, em funcionamento aquilo que é a sua proposta de trabalho, é difícil que eles consigam fazer isso. E eu, de facto, na minha cidade, quando era presidente de câmara, criei uma startup, criei um espaço de coworking e posso dizer-vos que imensas empresas hoje estão instaladas no tecido empresarial, dão trabalho a muita gente, mas criaram-se e começaram ali com duas ou três pessoas a trabalhar.
Portanto, eu acho que a Comissão deve olhar também para aí com um olhar muito atento. Obrigada.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And now we have reached the end of the speakers' list. Very many good questions. So we will give the floor back to Mrs. Passerman for the replies.
Katarina PASSARMAN
Thank you very much for this discussion and for these questions. I try to go through as much as I can. First of all, thank you very much Mrs. Gomes for your very good example of initial incubators in Portugal, because I think it's actually a good practice for everyone.
And just to be assured that to link also to the concept of one of the other questions about the future of the MFF, again, this issue of social innovation is actually one of the articles of the ESF that we discussed in the previous point and we will continue to support them. In general, on the multiannual financial framework, we believe that support for the social economy will be both through the NRPs and through the European Competitiveness Fund because social, sorry, InvestEU guarantee, which is now used to finance social enterprises and micro via microfinance is done using the InvestEU guarantee.
So we we intend to continue the same model and we know that actually it's actually very efficient way of spending European money because with as I mentioned in my slide with 1.2 billion in guarantees we have mobilized 11.7 billion for two implementing partners for microfinance, social entrepreneurship and social impact investment. So one of the question was how we can how is so this money is not spent the the guarantee the money spent via InvestEU is spent via implementing partners which implementing partners means either international organization like the European Investment Fund but also it can also be commercial banks. National commercial or regional commercial banks that use the guarantee to be able to support companies and companies including also social economy enterprises at the local level.
This is just to say that the money is, there is little money that goes directly from the European Commission to social economy enterprises. It either goes through implementing partners for the EIF in the guarantees, or it goes through the programs of the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund because it's support to companies. So it doesn't, we are typically not directly giving money to enterprises.
We, the Commission, is supporting very much all the networks of all the various associations, for example, the networks of the mutuelles or the network of ethical banks and so on. On the issue so then on the issue of cooperation with the DG GROW, I mean I want to reassure you. It is true that I am responsible for social economy and as a director and I am in DG Employment. But this unit is completely atypical in DG Employment.
We work a lot with other DGs, not only with DG GROW but also with other DGs. And the 63 actions of the Social Economy Action Plan have required a very wide responsibility across the Commission, including of course DG GROW, but also I don't know, for external relations, you know, the neighborhood countries, energy dealing with energy communities and so on.
So it remains an exercise very collaborative across the Commission. We are coordinating, but we are adamant that it should not be only about social enterprises in the sense of dealing only with, I don't know, employment of disadvantaged groups. This is what I said at the beginning. I mean, it is a model for working of enterprises which which put people and the planet before planet before profit, tend to reinvest the profits and tend to and have a democratic kind of governance, which is applicable for every sector. And here I come also to the question of MEP Angel on the workers' buyout.
This is indeed one thing which is coming more and more to prominence, also because SMEs, there is a generational, linking to the previous presentation perhaps, there is a generational change. There are a lot of small and medium-sized enterprises where the owner is retiring or passes away and that there is a need to maintain, I mean, there is either a wish of the workers to maintain the enterprise or also it can also be to avoid a buyout from someone from abroad which will then take away jobs from the area, or as I learned when I was in Spain, to maintain employment in little villages which otherwise would be depopulated because you lose the only place which is the only shop or the only bar in town and then this leads to a, you know, depopulation of the village.
So we are very much in favor to support workers' buyouts, and the ESF itself actually can also support workers' buyouts. Typically, again, it could be, for example, providing guarantees for the grants, you know, so the workers have the ability to put the money on the table to do the buyout in the first place. So, and yeah, and to continue, just to conclude on the way we work with DG, I think on public procurement, sorry, I think I didn't answer this, last but not least, it is indeed, we are working together with DG GROW on the proposal, the new proposal on public procurement.
To be honest, very, very honest, the difficulty is that the current text is actually already quite good. The problem is that it's difficult to implement it. I mean, in reality, the small municipalities have, you know, have difficulty to go for the smaller, the more, yeah, to go for, they are afraid to go for complicated constructions in the tenders, which is also giving money, you know, to disadvantaged companies that hire disadvantaged people or that have a social objective, etc.
It's just in practice they find it easier just to go for the cheaper offer. And so the question is emerging, maybe it's not so much to change the existing directive, but it's to provide guidance on how to implement them. So I'm not, I don't know where we're going to land at the end, maybe you will have better ideas, but we have the impression that it's not so easy actually, because the text itself is not so bad, the current text, if I'm clear. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Okay, thank you very much. This was very interesting. Thank you for these insights. As you all noticed, this action plan is of crucial importance, and this is also a topic that generates a lot of interest in the committee. So I'm sure we will be able to continue discussions regarding the social economy and how to develop it further in the European Union.
So thank you very much also to all members at this point, and we will continue at 2:30.
Redner 49
Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the EMPL Committee meeting. I would like to ask you to take your seats. We have a very busy agenda today. We will start with the adoption of the agenda.
Are there any comments or objections to the agenda as proposed? I see none. The agenda is adopted. Next, we have the approval of the minutes of the meetings of the 22nd and 23rd of January. Are there any comments or objections to these minutes?
I see none. The minutes are approved. Now, I have a few chair's announcements. First, I would like to inform you that the meeting is being webstreamed. Second, interpretation is available in all the usual languages.
Third, I would like to welcome our new colleague, who is joining us for the first time today. We are very happy to have you with us. Finally, I would like to remind you that we have a voting session at 11:00. Please make sure you are present for the votes. Now, we will move on to the first item on our agenda, which is the report on the European Semester for economic policy coordination.
I would like to give the floor to the rapporteur.
Good morning, everyone. I would like to welcome you to this EMPL committee meeting. I would like to ask you to take your seats. We have a very busy agenda today. And we will start with the adoption of the agenda.
The draft agenda has been circulated. Are there any comments or objections to the agenda? I see none. The agenda is adopted. We move to the next item, which is the Chair's announcements.
I would like to inform you that the meeting is being webstreamed. Interpretation is available in all the official languages of the European Union. I would also like to remind you that the voting session will take place at 11:00. We have several reports and opinions to vote on today. So please make sure you are present for the voting session.
Now we move to the first item on our agenda, which is the exchange of views with the European Commission on the European Pillar of Social Rights.
Stellen Sie eine Frage zu diesem Video – ich analysiere das Transkript, um Ihnen zu antworten.