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
EMPL European Parliament
Ihren Sitzungen folgenLi Andersson
And I also have to say with all due respect, in the spirit of good cooperation, I hope in the future it is possible to start more on time than now because the members of the committee are also busy people. So I think half an hour is a record in my committee and I like to stick to the schedules and also make sure everybody gets the chance to take the floor. So let's move on with the issues today. We know that we are living in a time when many Europeans are struggling with the rising housing cost, energy insecurity, precarious work, demographic pressures and growing inequalities. We also know that progress when it comes to the targets based on the European Pillar of Social Rights has not been near as good as it should be, especially when it comes to the poverty reduction target.
So against this backdrop, of course, the ambition to strengthen social inclusion, reduce poverty and support persons with disabilities and promote equal opportunities deserves both recognition and close attention from our committee. So while many details are still to come, this package is an important step in the right direction. And at the same time, a number of important questions remain open and I am sure that the members will be raising them today during this important discussion. So our committee stands ready to engage constructively with the Commission and all stakeholders to ensure that this package becomes not just a statement of intent, but a real instrument for improving the lives of people across the Union. So we really look forward to today's discussion and would like to start by giving the floor to you, Executive Vice-President, for the first 15 minutes.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you and I express my full apologies for for this big delay. So I'm really, I'm really sorry. But I'm very happy to be here today to exchange on on our social package adopted on the 6th of of May. It has been the result of extensive consultations, months of consultations at all level, also with the intergroup in the European Parliament, but also with people experiencing poverty, civil society, a lot, a lot of stakeholders. That being said, I need to thank first and foremost to the European Parliament for the very strong involvement in in the process and although as I've said in the plenary, it's not a perfect, is not a perfect package, but it is for sure a better package because the Parliament gave so much input and support and and push to this.
As you know, it's it's based, the package is based on four pillars: the first ever EU anti-poverty strategy, the strengthened EU European Child Guarantee, the proposal for a Council recommendation on housing exclusion and a communication on enhancing the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030. Now on the anti-poverty strategy, why act with a strategy at this moment? Simple answer is because the impact of poverty in Europe is is significant. One out of five Europeans experience a risk of poverty and social exclusion. Things will become worse if we do not act urgently.
We are looking at numbers on child poverty, for example, that we measure against the targets of the pillar and things are not, are not improving, just to give one example. And the numerous shocks that are occurring can also very easily make this one out of five even more significant.
So with less than four years to go towards our 2030 targets, including the one on anti-poverty, we see that we are not getting a realistic pathway towards achieving that goal, and so we really need to accelerate. Now, this strategy is not the full accelerator, but it does provide for a clear roadmap with concrete deliverables. I would communicate about these deliverables on three directions. First, we discussed about jobs, because work remains the most powerful route out of poverty. Of course, we don't speak about any types of jobs, we speak about quality jobs with fair wages, with good working conditions.
Also, we look at jobs and employment in the anti-poverty strategy from the perspective that one in 12 workers across the European Union is considered working poor. That is about 16 million people who have jobs and can barely manage life with the income that they have. And then there are more than 50 million people in Europe who are outside the labor market, a big part of them people who could work, but still remain outside the labor market and at great risk, at greater risk of social exclusion. And a big part of this category of population is women, is young people, is people with migrant background, just to name a few of those that are most exposed to poverty because of lack of routes to employment. And this is clearly a loss for everyone, for people that are denied a chance to build a better future, is for businesses that are struggling to find the talent that they need, but it's also a problem for our children whose prospects are shaped by whether their parents have a job, a good job or not.
Finally, obviously, I must say that it's a loss for the taxpayer who will finance more safety net measures for those that are most vulnerable and not helped in due time. Now, later this year, the Commission will launch the first stage consultation of our European social partners, that is the first step towards tabling a potential directive on effective activation measures for those excluded from the labor market. Second pillar on the anti-poverty strategy, access to quality services. People in poverty face systems that are hard to navigate. Many do not know what services they are eligible for or how these services can help them.
So we will propose a Council recommendation on integrated access to services, so that we are able to address exactly this, a better outreach, faster needs assessment, better cooperation between administrations, integrated support plans, personalized support plans for those in need. Third, what we are saying is that in order to fight poverty, we need to mobilize all actors, because it is a collective responsibility. And that's why we are calling on every Member State to appoint a national anti-poverty coordinator at the highest political level, if possible in the Prime Minister's office, so that we make sure that poverty is tackled with a whole-of-government approach, not just in one ministry, and also across all governance levels. We are also looking at how to deepen our partnerships with the Parliament and in particular, as I've mentioned, with the Intergroup on Fighting Poverty, with the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee, with the private sector and philanthropy through the new coalition against poverty which we plan to launch in the autumn, and crucially with people who have experienced poverty themselves. And this through a framework, a new structured dialogue that we are setting up so that we can work effectively with them.
Now, the scale of what is possible is clear. Just investing an additional 0.25% of the EU's GDP could help 18.5 million people leave poverty behind. The question is not whether we can afford to act, but is whether we can afford not to act.
Second part of our package is strengthening European Child Guarantee. We chose to put such a strong focus on child poverty because we know how important it is to tackle poverty really early. Poverty in childhood is a phenomenon that leaves scars that shape the lifetime of a person. It doesn't just deprive that child of opportunity, it takes away hope, it makes his life perspectives even worse. The European Child Guarantee has already helped expand access to essential services.
Since its launch, 450,000 more children under the age of three have gained access to early childhood care. 850,000 more children have joined school-based activities and school meals programs. But we must go further and ensure that it delivers real change in every child's life. And that is why the Commission plans to develop a new European Child Guarantee Card, a simple digital tool to help children in need access the support they are entitled to, making it more visible, coordinated and effective. And we will build stronger synergies between the Child Guarantee and the European Youth Guarantee so that vulnerable children continue to receive support as they become young adults.
Third, on the proposal for a Council Recommendation on fighting housing exclusion, which comes on top of the European Affordable Housing Plan adopted in December last year. When we speak of housing exclusion, we are not just referring to homelessness, which is still a reality for more than one million people across Europe. We are also speaking about people who have a roof over their heads but might be only one shock away from housing exclusion. We think of students, of single parents, of low-income workers, but also the many middle-class families who took on mortgages at variable interest rates and now struggle to repay them. We are putting forward a new approach to housing exclusion, moving from emergency responses to prevention and long-term solutions.
So if I had to sum it up in two words, housing first is the principle. Our proposal sets out measures that Member States can take to better support those most at risk of losing their homes. Early warning systems, person-centered support like debt counseling or targeted rental support, these are just some examples. We will also help governments expand affordable and social housing by mobilizing investment, reusing existing homes and supporting diverse housing models. Finally, just a few words on the communication on enhancing the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030.
Around 90 million Europeans live with a disability. For too many of them, rights that exist on paper are still not a reality in daily life, whether it is access to work, education, transport or independent living. This is not only a question of fairness and equal rights, it is also a question of Europe's social and economic strength. That is why we are reinforcing our strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030 with a clear focus on delivery. We will roll out concrete tools like the digital European Disability Card and the European Parking Card to improve accessibility across transport and public services.
And we will help make independent living a reality for persons with disabilities. We will launch an EU alliance to support the creation of centers for independent living, backed by EU funding and step up actions for inclusive education and employment. With an aging population and a growing number of acquired disabilities, disability can happen to everyone at any point in time, so it is something that concerns us all. In the end, I just want to say that I hear your calls, you first said it in the plenary as well, disappointment that there is no fresh money or that there are not strong enough binding tools to make this strategy work on the ground. This package is indeed calibrated, it respects the treaty framework while reflecting also today's political realities.
But I think that we need to acknowledge that this package is not just pioneering, it is practical. It will help Member States act faster, more effectively, combining jobs and support in a way that works, with guidance and measures to improve fight against poverty, including child poverty. It is definitely not enough. We all agree that the challenge is much greater. And to all those questioning EU-level social legislation, it will help Member States tackle shared challenges.
It will help them do that by tackling insecure jobs, labour shortages, high housing costs, lack of childcare, complicated access to support. It helps them doing so through legislation that is justified, not just for the sake of it. It's a very long speech, so I would rather end it now. Please, sorry, I don't know, colleagues. I would ask answer your questions.
Li Andersson
Okay, thank you very much. And we will then move on to the questions from the group coordinators or other group representatives. And I thought I would take two questions at a time. So two questions, answers, two questions, answers. Two minutes each, starting with Mr Radtke from EPP.
Dennis Radtke
Ja, danke, Frau Vorsitzende, ich werde auf Deutsch sprechen. Haben Sie den richtigen Kanal? Funktioniert es? Funktioniert es jetzt? Funktioniert's?
Klappt? Ja? Klappt oder klappt nicht? Funktioniert es oder nicht? Oh.
Okay, gibt mir jemand ein Signal, wenn es funktioniert? Ja, das ist super. Ja, dann fange ich an. Ja, Frau Vorsitzende, liebe Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Roxana, herzlichen Dank für die Gelegenheit zum Austausch, herzlichen Dank für die kurze Übersicht, die du uns hier gegeben hast. Ich meine, die Gesetzgebung, die nun aufgegleist werden soll, wird natürlich hier in diesem Ausschuss mit großer Spannung erwartet, weil die Schwerpunkte in dieser Legislaturperiode natürlich bisher ganz andere waren, umso mehr schauen natürlich alle da drauf.
Für mich ist aber auch klar aus meiner Perspektive, das, was jetzt als Erstes kommen soll, kann eigentlich nicht losgelöst betrachtet werden von dem, was sonst noch in der Pipeline ist. Und das ist für mich zum einen die Diskussion, wie geht's weiter mit dem ESF+ und zum anderen natürlich auch das Paket, was in der zweiten Jahreshälfte kommen soll, Stichwort Fair Labour Mobility, weil wenn wir am Ende über soziale Dimensionen reden, kann man das nicht losgelöst voneinander betrachten. Und für mich ist auch klar, wir können in diesem Paket nette Maßnahmen auf den Weg bringen, wenn wir aber sozusagen an der wichtigsten Grundlage für Kofinanzierung von vielen Projekten gleichzeitig rütteln, dann ist es nicht nur wertlos, sondern das ist kontraproduktiv. Und deswegen ist es für mich ganz essenziell, dass wir diese Diskussion nicht losgelöst voneinander führen, sondern dass wir diese Diskussion ganzheitlich führen und kann nur nochmals darum bitten, dass wenn dieser Prozess jetzt aufgegleist wird, das in einer Art und Weise zu tun, die es für uns im Parlament am Ende auch händelbar macht, damit wir am Ende auch wirklich zu einem Gesamtpaket kommen, das für die große Mehrheit hier im Parlament vertretbar ist und das uns in den entsprechenden Aspekten auch nach vorne bringt. Dankeschön.
Gabriele Bischoff
Dann kann ich vielleicht mal ausnahmsweise in Deutsch auch weitermachen und kann da sehr gut anschließen. Wir begrüßen wirklich sehr, dass das Paket vorgelegt wurde. Wir sehen das auch in einer Linie auf der einen Seite mit dem Quality Jobs Act, aber insbesondere ist wichtig, wenn wir Armut wirklich bekämpfen wollen, dass wir sicherstellen, dass wir die Ressourcen dafür haben. Also ich will ein Beispiel geben. Ich war letzte Woche in der Grünen Woche in einem Housing First Projekt der Caritas für Frauen spezifisch ausgerichtet.
Ein ESF-Projekt, was wirklich unwahrscheinlich erfolgreich ist. Zu wissen, dass wir alleine in meinem Land 40 % weniger Mittel haben werden für solche Projekte, wo wir sehen, dass der Bedarf eigentlich größer wird, denn wir schaffen es ja nicht, die Armut einzugrenzen, ist wirklich, das müssen wir zusammen sehen und wirklich dafür kämpfen, dass wir nicht nur die Ressourcen haben, sondern dass sie auch festgelegt sind dann tatsächlich zur Armutsbekämpfung hier. Und die Zahlen sprechen ja hier für sich tatsächlich, dass wir hier eben auch gucken, und das ist richtig, was für Rahmenbedingungen müssen wir schaffen, dass die Menschen, von denen du gesprochen hast, Roxana, die eben außerhalb des Arbeitsmarktes sind, wirklich auch gute Rahmenbedingungen haben. Dazu gehört Kinderbetreuung zum Beispiel. Dazu gehören gute Schulen, damit sie wirklich dann auch am Arbeitsleben partizipieren können.
Deshalb die Richtung stimmt, aber wir müssen es schaffen, die notwendigen Ressourcen dafür festzulegen. Wenn wir das nicht hinbekommen, dann ist es, als würde man einen Tisch haben, wo die Beine wirklich nicht ausbalanciert sind. Das wird nicht funktionieren. Und ich glaube, wenn wir nicht dafür sorgen, dass wir ausreichend Partizipation an der Gesellschaft haben, dann wird es enorme Auswirkungen für unsere Gesellschaft haben. Deshalb Unterstützung für die Vorschläge.
Wir wissen, die Kompetenzen sind da sehr begrenzt, aber wir haben die Möglichkeit, die Ressourcen dafür zu schaffen. Und das müssen wir jetzt auch wirklich zusammen hinkriegen. Der Beschäftigungsausschuss hat das hier als klare gemeinsame Position, aber wir müssen das richtig stark in die Verhandlungen bringen, sonst fürchte ich, wird es in weiten Teilen ein leeres Versprechen bleiben.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you for many comments. Today is not my day, I tell you. For many comments, not necessarily maybe questions. I agree with you. I think that the strategy is also a driver in the negotiations.
Sorry, sorry. Can you hear me? I agree with you. I think the existence of this new strategy should be a driver in the negotiations between co-legislators on the budget, on the ESF+ included, on the national plans, on the whole MFF, because in the end, resources, but also administrative capacity, the right measures and policies combined will generate the impact that we have.
For example, on the discussion that we have on activation policy and the potential activation directive, what we say is that we need the right combination between pathways toward employment and support through different types of services and many times benefits. The combination, the personalized, the integrated approach is the one that delivers. And many times this is about exactly supporting equality between men and women because it is meant to also support a lot of women that are taking care of their children and unable to continue their career due to lack of childcare, for example, or a person with disability who would be able to perform a certain type of role professionally but cannot do that due to different, you know, lack of adaptation of workplace, lack of, you know, support services that they would need so that they can go to work. And this is quite important. And in all of this, ESF does play a role because with ESF we have developed so much of our European capacity to deliver social services.
So I cannot say that I disagree to the least with you. I would not say that the strategy is only budget. So the value of the strategy resides also in how supported it will be financially, yes, by the whole of the MFF, not just ESF, but by the whole cohesion policy. But it is also about the type of political ambition and direction that we set. And I think, for example, on child guarantee, while I totally agree that it's important to invest more resources, it is also important that we know that every child effectively has access within reach to those five basic services, and if not, that we can do something about it, which currently is not the case.
That's why we pilot this European child card. It's important to make sure that, you know, it's not just statistics helping children, it's every child really knowing case by case what their situation is and being able to cover the gaps if they exist. But again, my full support throughout these complicated negotiations towards a strong social dimension and a strong ESF for the next period. I think that it is important that the ESF is there, strong and well-budgeted, but also that the entire cohesion policy and also private and financial instruments are also present so that we can fully support a whole-of-society approach to fighting poverty.
Séverine Werbrouck
Merci, Madame la Présidente. Je parlerai en français. Madame la Commissaire, un emploi de qualité, c'est le meilleur moyen de sortir de la pauvreté. Cette phrase se trouve dans votre communication sur la stratégie anti-pauvreté. La pauvreté gagne du terrain sur notre continent et vous avez raison de parler des personnes qui vivent dans la pauvreté et de celles que la pauvreté rattrape.
Dans tous les pays, les employés se rapprochent du salaire minimum et le seuil de pauvreté se rapproche aussi à grands pas. Cela a une raison principale, c'est l'inflation, c'est l'effondrement de notre économie. Et ces deux raisons, vous ne pouvez pas vous en dédouaner, vous en êtes largement responsables. Votre politique est suicidaire. Ce plan, c'est un pansement qu'on donne à un mourant.
Si la pauvreté gagne du terrain, c'est parce que vous avez ruiné l'économie avec le Green Deal, le libre-échange déraisonné, les normes qui empêchent de produire. Vous avez organisé et laissé encore perdurer le dumping social en nous mettant en concurrence avec des pays tiers totalement déréglementés. Et il faut aussi parler du sujet tabou, le dumping social entre les pays de l'Union européenne.
Quand on perd son emploi, on a 66 % de chances de sombrer dans la pauvreté. Certaines délocalisations n'ont pas seulement coûté des emplois, elles ont vidé, ruiné des bassins entiers, dévasté des territoires où c'est aujourd'hui un parcours du combattant pour trouver un emploi plus précaire et moins bien payé que celui qu'on a perdu. Vous avez également signé le traité du Mercosur, poussant nos agriculteurs à la ruine. Ils entraînent avec eux leurs familles, toute une économie locale et des territoires qui sombrent silencieusement dans la misère. Je pourrais aussi vous parler des pêcheurs à qui on interdit administrativement de travailler pendant de longues périodes.
Trouver un travail ne permet même plus forcément de sortir de la pauvreté. Près d'un dixième des travailleurs vivent sous le seuil de pauvreté. Et on veut leur rajouter une dette commune à rembourser pour financer des projets européens qui satisferont avant tout les rêves des eurocrates plutôt que les besoins réels des Européens. Alors je vais vous le dire avec toute la gravité que le sujet impose. Vous n'avez pas versé toutes les demandes centralisatrices et contre-productives, soit, mais je constate d'un autre côté que vous persévérez dans son idéologie destructrice.
Nous soutiendrons ce qui va dans l'intérêt de nos compatriotes, mais ce plan n'est ni une solution ni un remède. Merci.
Chiara Gemma
Grazie Presidente, grazie Vicepresidente Minzato per la sua presentazione. Io vorrei soffermarmi sulla particolare fase che sta attraversando il mercato del lavoro europeo riconducibile, appunto, al suo pacchetto sociale. Da un lato molte imprese continuano a segnalare difficoltà crescenti nel reperire lavori qualificati. Dall'altro persistono disallineamenti strutturali tra sistemi di istruzione e formazione, fabbisogni produttivi e competenze richieste dall'economia europea. A questo si aggiungono l'invecchiamento della popolazione attiva, il calo demografico, le trasformazioni determinate dalla digitalizzazione e dall'intelligenza artificiale.
In questo contesto credo che la priorità debba essere quella di rafforzare la competitività europea attraverso una migliore valorizzazione del capitale umano, favorendo l'acquisizione di competenze realmente richieste dal mercato del lavoro e aumentando la partecipazione all'occupazione e dunque sostenendo la capacità delle imprese di investire, innovare e creare posti di lavoro di qualità. Per raggiungere questi obiettivi sarà essenziale che le future iniziative europee rispettino pienamente i requisiti di sussidiarietà e proporzionalità. Come intende quindi la Commissione affrontare concretamente il crescente mismatch tra competenze e fabbisogni del mercato del lavoro garantendo che le future iniziative del pacchetto sociale sostengano realmente imprese, lavoratori e giovani con disabilità? E poi, durante l'ultima sessione plenaria, il Parlamento europeo ha approvato con larghissima maggioranza la risoluzione sulla necessità di ridurre le morti correlate al lavoro. Si tratta di un segnale politico molto forte che conferma quanto la sicurezza e la salute sul lavoro restino una priorità centrale per il futuro della dimensione sociale europea.
Alla luce dell'ampio sostegno espresso dal Parlamento europeo, quali iniziative intende adottare la Commissione per dare seguito a questo chiaro indirizzo politico e rafforzare ulteriormente l'impegno europeo in materia di salute e sicurezza sul lavoro nel prossimo quadro strategico post-27? Grazie.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you so much. I think that Europe, the European Union project has always been a promise of prosperity for European citizens and coming from Romania I would say that of course it did not solve, for example in that part of Europe, the entire challenge of poverty, but it for sure meant a solution for a big part. Decreasing poverty in one of our member states from 37% to 27% in some years is not really, of course 27 is still a lot, but it's happened because of the European project and it's because of ESF and because of the support and the of the concrete tools that the European Union is putting at the disposal of member states. Now, I think that we need and I just want to acknowledge that we need to look at the realities of our economies, of our geopolitical contexts and treat poverty, again not ideologically, it's something that could happen to any one of us. Look at what's happening in the Middle East.
Thank you very much, and back to Vice-President Minzato.
We can look at all the technological transformations. Persons with education, with income, with they can still be much more severely vulnerable to shocks than previous generations were because there's also a very complicated context worldwide. So this needs to be taken into consideration as to why we need a European and not just national anti-poverty strategies because together we are stronger and together we fight more effectively our big challenges. That being said, I think it is important moving to the questions on skills mismatches and OSH. It's important to say that the anti-poverty strategy of course does not respond directly to all the needs that we have in our labour markets.
I've spoken about ways to support people outside labour market to get a job through a combination of access to services, adaptation of workplaces, support to employers. But there is a skills mismatch as you've mentioned it and this we want to address also with other tools. In the Union of Skills we've launched the skills guarantee for workers. It's one example through which we invest resources and of course encourage member states to do similarly so that workers can retain a job in an industry where they are already set or in a new industry by retraining, by you know all types of support that can help them position themselves in a job with new skills or with upgraded skills, just to give an example. On health and safety because you've mentioned Europe's ambition on Vision Zero, health and safety is first for our workers and our societies.
It's a big part of the Quality Jobs Act that we are preparing actually. We are now at the second phase consultation for the Quality Jobs Act so a big chapter is related to improving our health and safety rules, looking at you know new elements like climate-related for example health and safety but not only. So really our ambition on health and safety remains intact and with rules, with legislation we are moving forward. I think it's important that I mention that we need to look at the anti-poverty strategy in a package with what we do on the Quality Jobs Act, with what we are implementing in the Union of Skills, with the Fair Labour Mobility package that we will launch in September, the vocational education strategy that we come up with in October, education package that I will present in November.
There is a number of initiatives, some legislative, some non-legislative, and they are all together meant to support people to be better educated, to get better jobs, to have more dignity in the workplace, and for those vulnerable to get the right combination of support and integrated support so that they are able to live a life in dignity. So anti-poverty strategy is part of this bigger, of this bigger narrative.
Elisabetta Gualmini
Yeah, thank you, thank you so much, and thank you, dear Vice-President. I think that this is really a systematic effort, so a social package in which, you know, the functions of prevention, planning, and also coordination among Member States are there. So I think this is really an important kind of, you know, package that puts together a series of, you know, interventions. So we are really looking forward to the different, you know, pillars of the package. So I've got three points.
The first one, I think that the, you know, the accessibility to the public services is extremely important against poverty because if you look at the data, we see that the percentage of the so-called take-up, you know, by citizens, by people in need of the measures against poverty, this percentage is very low everywhere in Europe. Also because sometimes, you know, local institutions are involved and so maybe it is not so easy also to have harmonized data, but the implementation of the take-up is really very low. So I think that to insist on that, it's very important. Also because the European indicators actually measure the probability to fall into the risk of poverty, and so we need more data on the effectiveness of our measures. So I'd like to ask you what you think about that.
Second point, we know that work is no more a deterrent, a deterrent against poverty, so the number of working poors is growing and growing, so we are sort of Americanizing ourselves in a negative way this time. And I think that it would be important also to put, you know, the attention on outplacement kind of services. So sometimes the European labor market, especially in some countries, is very rigid, so it's very difficult to find a job once you have lost it, especially for women. And so to have, you know, some outplacement measures in place, it's going to be very important. Third point, as for housing, why don't we ask, I know it's not easy, to take out the public expenditure for social housing, for housing, from the Stability Pact, from the next MFF?
So this is my third question. Thank you so much.
Maria Ohisalo
Thank you very much, Chair, dear Commissioner, Ms. Atto, welcome here. This social package was eagerly awaited, definitely, and I can fully agree with the underlying statement of the anti-poverty strategy that it is considerably easier to prevent poverty or homelessness than to then try to solve it both later on. And let's face it, those are both often results of our political choices, they are not predestined or laws of nature that cannot be avoided.
So some reflections from the Greens side. The Commission's affordable housing plan mainly left homelessness to be addressed in this anti-poverty strategy. Yet the only tangible measure it proposes on the housing crisis is the Council recommendation on housing exclusion, which now has been presented as well. We have no new targets on implementation, and any references to eradicate homelessness have been dropped. So we're dampening down our ambitions to tackle homelessness, unfortunately.
And we as Greens also regret that the proposed measures to tackle unemployment focus on entrepreneurship. We believe that those who are not active in the labour market are not likely to be starting a small business to begin with. It's often quite different groups and different problems there. I'm also disappointed that there are no new initiatives on transport and energy poverty. And maybe to end with is that we didn't solve COVID crisis without resources.
We're not solving climate crisis without legislation. So how can we tackle poverty if we don't have enough resources and enough concrete legislation?
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And last speaker in this part is Mr Oliveira from the Left.
João Oliveira
I'll speak in Portuguese. Obrigado, presidente, senhora comissária Minzat, já tivemos oportunidade de fazer uma discussão no plenário na última sessão sobre a estratégia que a Comissão Europeia apresentou. Eu queria começar por insistir em alguns aspectos que nos parecem fundamentais e que resultam do relatório que foi aprovado no Parlamento Europeu. Já foram abordados também noutras intervenções. Em primeiro lugar, a ideia de que as questões da pobreza não são apenas questões de falta de rendimento.
São também de negação de direitos em múltiplas dimensões da vida das pessoas que estão em situação de pobreza. E por isso o combate à pobreza exige políticas de emprego, de acesso ao emprego e de garantia de direitos de quem trabalha, serviços públicos de qualidade e gratuitos, acesso à habitação, cultura, o direito a viver com um ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado. Tudo isto numa abordagem global com critério transversal às diversas políticas sectoriais no sentido da erradicação da pobreza com o necessário financiamento para que essas políticas possam ser concretizadas e garantindo a possibilidade de participação política das pessoas que vivem em situação de pobreza. Preocupam-nos os sinais que vão sendo dados em sentido contrário. Em primeiro lugar, um enquadramento das questões da pobreza por via da competitividade, o apontar do objectivo da erradicação da pobreza para 2050 quando neste momento se está a discutir a militarização da União Europeia como objectivo apontado para 2030, com um contraponto absolutamente inaceitável entre a prioridade que devia ser dada às questões sociais e aquela que está a ser dada à militarização.
O problema da falta de compromisso no financiamento, a falta de firmeza no combate às discriminações que atingem as mulheres, as pessoas com deficiência, os migrantes, as comunidades ciganas, as minorias étnicas e outras pessoas que são discriminadas em função da sua identidade ou da sua orientação sexual. Queria colocar-lhe algumas perguntas muito rápidas. Em relação ao emprego, há políticas que estão a ser feitas na Grécia, na Bélgica, também em Portugal, no sentido exactamente contrário do agravar das condições de trabalho e de perpetuar a pobreza entre quem trabalha. Como é que se compatibiliza a erradicação da pobreza com estas políticas? Como é que se compatibiliza o acesso aos serviços públicos com as restrições orçamentais que os Estados-Membros continuam a ter para esse investimento?
Na habitação, onde estão os meios para fazer face às carências habitacionais, particularmente para aumentar a oferta de habitação pública, incluindo as medidas de emergência para erradicar a situação de sem-abrigo? Deixarei outras questões para outra ronda.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you. Well, I wish our anti-poverty strategy could be in those 18 pages, the solution to the magnitude of the challenge that we have, but it's clearly, as I've said, just a first, a first step. And not having had it would have been, I think, extremely dangerous. So the fact that we do have an anti-poverty strategy with clear directions on prevention and also on how we want to support with this very multi-dimensional approach is important. Does it have enough binding rules?
Does it have budget? I do understand your point, but of course, as I think I've explained, my opinion is that budgets are built after political priorities. Budgets are not built with each strategy a different budget. It's important, it would never, it would never work. So what, what we propose here is to tackle the different problems that we have also identified, not just through our own research, but engaging with stakeholders.
For example, you've mentioned accessibility of services or non-take-up of services, which is one, not simple problem. It's not a simple, it's a complex problem. But the services sometimes are there, and people that are entitled to do not know about them or cannot reach them or cannot access them. We need to do something about first thing that, just to give you an example, which is tackled in, in the strategy with initiatives that we have for next year. Or how we can improve in the end access to services in a more coordinated way, and that means also how authorities work so that they deliver on these services.
So it's also a question of better organization, better capacity, and better coordination between us to deliver on these services that are already, already there. Then on the working poor, indeed, I totally agree that unfortunately it's not necessarily going in the right direction. That's why we mention all the time quality jobs. Whether we want to support a life in dignity through access to employment, but not any type of employment, but quality jobs, or we tackle the quality jobs through the Quality Jobs Act, it's clearly a target that we have at European level, that we're not discussing about employment and that's it. It's about dignified employment.
So this is present in the anti-poverty strategy as is present in other initiatives, just to emphasize that the simple measurement of number of jobs, of number of people employed is not enough, that we want to be able to look at the quality of employment from salary to working conditions, health and safety, so on and so forth. And then of course, an escape clause on housing. Everybody wants escape clauses now for a lot of things from the budgetary constraints. I think that what we try to do is come with alternative solutions, as I've said, looking at gathering financial resources beyond MFF from private sector, financial institutions, because we also need to consider what is possible, you know, what is politically possible to put, to put forward. Housing is a tremendous need, investment need.
Of course, there are opportunities already in cohesion policy and will be in the future in the MFF, but still no public budget can accommodate the investments that we need to do in social housing, in housing for youth. There is a necessity to really look at the whole landscape of tools. For example, my colleague Dan Jørgensen will come with a, with your, with an Affordable Housing Act.
So there's a number of of tools that we need to put to put forward. On fighting homelessness, the Council recommendation is in itself a very good step. We did not have that before. We could some people said 10 years ago they couldn't have imagined that we have a Council recommendation on housing exclusion. There we look at prevention, we look at how we recommend Member States to to support the development of social housing projects, how to be able to to better offer services to those that are affected by housing exclusion.
Of course there are no targets, it's a Council recommendation, but it is we think a tool that will push Member States to act better, faster, more efficient on addressing housing exclusion. It is a strong political tool. I also think that well we addressed a number of tools on how we support people outside labor market, access to services, access to jobs, benefits, but also social economy is mentioned because we've engaged with so many stakeholders and we try to cover again a myriad of of solutions. And there's no one size fits all to fighting poverty. It can be medical causes, energy causes, transport causes, it can be inherited transgenerationally, it can be stigma, it can be a number of things.
And we try to look at all of them to set a direction, a political ambition, and I think this has been this has been achieved.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. We then move on to the second round. We will take all the questions in one block, one and a half minutes each. So if there are members who wish to take the floor please indicate. And we are starting with Mrs. Lacapelle from the EPP.
Isabelle Le Callennec
Oui, merci Madame la Présidente. Le paquet social nous incite à améliorer l'accès à l'emploi, lutter contre la pauvreté, notamment celle des enfants, renforcer l'inclusion des personnes en situation de handicap et s'attaquer à l'exclusion liée au logement. Nous ne pouvons évidemment que partager cette ambition européenne. Mais ces intentions louables ne pourront se concrétiser qu'à condition d'un budget européen 2028-2034 à la hauteur. Or, comme vous le savez Madame la Commissaire, nous sommes inquiets pour l'avenir du FSE+.
14 % dédiés à la cohésion sociale dans les plans nationaux et régionaux, nous pensons que le compte n'y est pas. En outre, pour travailler avec la rapporteure sur le règlement performance, je vous avoue qu'il est bien difficile de l'appliquer aux politiques sociales. Moi je prendrai deux exemples : la lutte contre le sans-abrisme et l'aide alimentaire. Quel sort leur sera réservé ? Quelles directions générales de la Commission seront chargées de promouvoir ces programmes et d'évaluer leur mise en œuvre ?
Les acteurs locaux, souvent des associations, nous demandent à raison de consacrer des enveloppes clairement identifiées et des indicateurs de réalisation lisibles, réalistes et adaptés aux réalités de terrain. Pouvez-vous, Madame la Commissaire, les rassurer ? Je vous remercie.
Estelle Ceulemans
Madame la Vice-Présidente exécutive, chère Roxana, je sais que vous ne pouvez que partager mon sentiment que aujourd'hui, en 2026, dans un continent développé comme l'Europe, la pauvreté est insupportable alors qu'elle touche effectivement des travailleurs qui malgré leur travail n'arrivent pas à vivre décemment, qu'elle touche un enfant sur quatre en Europe, qu'elle touche les femmes. Voilà. Alors évidemment, avoir un plan qui pour sortir enfin pour éradiquer la pauvreté en 2050 est remarquable. Mais on sait que ça va être extrêmement difficile vu effectivement le caractère multidimensionnel de cette pauvreté, le caractère répétitif aussi de génération en génération. Alors et vu aussi, ben ça vient d'être souligné, le dé-financement en tout cas des politiques sociales dans le prochain MFF qui est évidemment notre grande crainte.
Donc moi j'ai trois questions pour vous. Vous avez évoqué le fait que on renoncerait donc à l'objectif de l'objectif de 2030 qui était pourtant de sortir 15 millions de personnes de la pauvreté dont et 5 millions d'enfants. Alors que voilà, qu'est-ce qui va se faire dans le cadre du prochain plan d'action pour la mise en œuvre du pilier européen des droits sociaux ?
En plus, voilà, 2050, à titre personnel j'aurai 80 ans. Donc ça veut dire que c'est tellement un horizon lointain et la crainte c'est évidemment qu'on se retrouve dans la même situation en 2046 qu'aujourd'hui en 2026, c'est-à-dire que les États membres n'auront rien fait ou pas pris suffisamment de mesures non plus pour éradiquer cette pauvreté. Donc est-ce qu'il ne serait pas nécessaire aussi de mettre des étapes intermédiaires, des milestones ? Et dernier élément, alors comment renforcer les budgets européens, que ce soit le Fonds social européen plus, que ce soit la Child Guarantee ou que ce soit l'accès à un logement abordable ? Merci.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Gracias, presidente, señora comisaria, señorías. La primera condición para una estrategia social que acabe con la pobreza es la integridad institucional. Sin integridad no hay una orientación al bien común. La corrupción genera pobreza. Actualmente, los españoles atravesamos un momento preocupante.
Mientras miles de ciudadanos sufren las consecuencias de la inflación, el encarecimiento de la vivienda, la precariedad laboral y la pérdida de poder adquisitivo, el gobierno de Pedro Sánchez se ve rodeado de continuos escándalos de corrupción que demuestran la falta de integridad institucional. El uso inapropiado partidista de los recursos públicos es siempre grave, pero se hace especialmente despreciable cuando tantas familias tienen dificultades para llegar a fin de mes. Se exige al ciudadano ejemplaridad y esfuerzo sin medida, mientras se conceden todo tipo de licencias a quienes están abusando de su posición política. Cuando los organismos públicos, los controles democráticos y la rendición de cuentas se ignoran, comienza un consecuente deterioro democrático y social con consecuencias a todos los niveles: degradación de los servicios públicos con graves repercusiones como accidentes en redes de transporte, colapso sanitario, inseguridad en las calles, buscando votos que supongan incluso la ruptura de la estabilidad social. Usted es vicepresidente de la Comisión Europea.
¿Cómo valora el deterioro democrático y social derivado de una gestión corrupta institucional? ¿Existe preocupación por parte de la Comisión ante las constantes noticias que se publican sobre lo que está sucediendo en el gobierno de Pedro Sánchez? Gracias.
João Oliveira
Obrigado, presidente, senhora comissária, dando sequência às perguntas que já há pouco lhe tinha colocado, queria dizer-lhe ainda que é absolutamente essencial termos um sistema robusto de prestações sociais que retire as pessoas da situação de pobreza, incluindo as crianças. E a questão é como é que isso se compatibiliza com uma medida que é um verdadeiro assalto aos sistemas públicos de segurança social, que é a união das poupanças e os investimentos, que visa desviar os recursos financeiros dos sistemas de segurança social para outros objetivos, e como é que se dá combate à pobreza infantil sem dar sequência à proposta que foi aprovada por este Parlamento no relatório sobre a estratégia de combate à pobreza de uma dotação específica de 20 mil milhões para a garantia para a infância. Sobre as pessoas com deficiência, para quem enfrenta discriminações no acesso ao emprego, para quem enfrenta dificuldades no acesso aos serviços públicos, para quem enfrenta inúmeros obstáculos a uma vida independente, tem que se ir muito além de um cartão de estacionamento, porque naturalmente isto fica muito longe daquilo que são as necessidades das pessoas com deficiência e é preciso medidas concretas para isso. E por fim, a questão da pobreza entre os idosos.
É preciso interromper o ciclo da pobreza para que as crianças pobres de hoje não sejam os trabalhadores pobres de amanhã e os idosos pobres no dia seguinte. Mas é preciso hoje resposta àqueles que já hoje, sendo idosos, são pobres e têm necessidade de uma resposta imediata e urgente. E esta dimensão da pobreza é uma dimensão que também não é abordada com a relevância que ela deve ter.
Li Andersson
Thank you, and I have no further requests for the floor, so we will use the last 10 minutes for answers and your final remarks.
Roxana Mînzatu
Somehow I was compensated for my delay so that I didn't take the time for anybody. Going back to ESF discussion about how important it is to offer food support, to support people that are affected by homelessness. ESF is for sure part of the response. What we proposed in the national plans is part, not the entirety of the response. I also think that, for example, to be able to fight homelessness efficiently is not just a question of, you know, developing with ESF a number of services.
It's a question of also housing first, so building infrastructure, the housing infrastructure, which is done also with other resources. So that brings in front my point that fighting poverty is a whole-of-government, whole-of-finance approach. Yes, ESF is quintessential to the success of many measures in the anti-poverty strategy, but by itself it couldn't in any way solve the complex challenge that lies ahead. So that's why, again, I say, provided we have a good-sized budget, overall budget, with new own resources, with good allocations for member states, ESF and other resources would be able to tackle effectively our fight against poverty. And that's why I said it's important that we place the political coordination of anti-poverty strategies not just in the Ministry of Social Affairs or of social policies, but at the level of Prime Minister, so that we can tackle energy poverty, transport poverty, education, healthcare, budgeting systems.
So this is something that we already did with not just the anti-poverty strategy, but with the set of guidance and principles that we attached to this policy, which voluntarily, of course, member states will be invited to use and we will push a lot that they use. On food aid, here I visited France, I've seen Restos du Cœur, for example, where I know how important ESF is in terms of, you know, part of the functioning of this support system. And I think that for this, ESF is indeed quintessential and we need a strong budget for that because this is the type of intervention where you first create trust with somebody, you can support with food package or, I don't know, any basic kind of supply, but then you create trust to discuss other needs: employment, legal aid, personal support, and then you can build on that. And it's a very good entry path towards the life and the soul of a person that really needs that kind of support. And for that, ESF I think is quite important.
Can I reassure? I cannot reassure. I won't reassure. But of course we have a big negotiation process on the budget. I do engage continuously with member states, with ministers, like I'm here in Parliament, but especially with council, with member states, where I do advocate all the time and I will continue to do so throughout this year for new own resources, strong dimension of social budget.
Now that the anti-poverty strategy is out, I also advocate for that because I spoke a lot about education, skills as well. So I am also working on that front so that I am, beyond the Commission proposal, part of a stronger plea towards a social dimension of the budget that is strong, a socially, an ESF that is, that is strong. But I cannot, of course, give here concrete, concrete commitments looking at where the negotiation process is. Then indeed also the way that we set our ambitions, we measure our ambitions in fighting poverty, there is, I also agree, there is here a mismatch. We have 2030 pillar targets which we are not getting close to, to reaching indeed, but the anti-poverty strategy does help to accelerate efforts towards making this gap as small as possible.
And I think yes, I agree that we would need intermediary targets for our 2050 ambition, that is, that is for sure. This is just a first strategy. It does look a lot, as you have seen, the deliverables, at things that we will do by 2028, 2029, 2030, so it's a first step. But we will need to continue and we can, of course, work together on intermediary targets as well because without targets we cannot move, what is not measured is not being done. So this is important.
Also we are working, as you know, on a new indicators that measure affordability, so we are trying also to find new indicators that would help us measure even better what matters so that we can finance even more focused our, our policies. On Spain, I mean, what can I, what can I comment? It's a question of the judicial and investigations and the situation that is handled there in the Member State. What is important from, from my perspective is that beyond the political scene, which is, democracy brings an, uh, turmoil to the political scene, we are able to maintain a bit of clear focus with all our governments and Member States on things that are very, you know, very systematic and structural. And fighting poverty cannot be, you know, a side subject.
It is quintessential and I want the full attention of governments, the full attention of Member States, the full attention of stakeholders, whoever those may be. And this is what, what is important, that's why we engage with governments continuously so that we make sure they understand where we are going and that we can go there together. On child poverty, we agree, I mean, fundamentally we agree that it's, it's essential that we act early. It's the most efficient way to break poverty is to support children that are at risk of poverty, their parents, that household. Nothing compares to that kind of intervention.
And beyond the call that this Parliament has made for more resources to the Child Guarantee, that's why we put a reinforced Child Guarantee communication so that we focus, so that we emphasize how important it is. Okay, people might be, you know, in some Member States maybe satisfied with where they are, maybe they are not, maybe they are going towards other priorities. There is no way we can ever let this go.
Fighting zero child poverty is the the most the most important ambition that one politician I think could have, but you need also to be pragmatic and realistic and and and practical about how you are able to deliver such such such an ambition. So that's why we looked at how we can reinforce the child guarantee. You have seen beyond the services that need to be covered according to the recommendation, we look also at children's safety online and offline, child guarantee card, a better connection between the child guarantee and the and the youth guarantee, helping parents means helping children. That's why the activation the activation proposal is one that benefits also children in in the respective household. It's I think an important signal that we give signal like emphasizing or putting the the the attention on on child poverty because we could do that with energy poverty, transport poverty, any type of poverty deserves full attention and a myriad of tools.
But we think that acting early in childhood is the game changer. And that's why you find it in the package so so well so well emphasized. To conclude, again and again apologies for my delay today. I maybe have not been able to deliver my best in my exchange with you today, but you know that bilaterally I'm here to to try to work as as as agile as possible in this complex landscape. I think that you are right, we need budget.
I think that you are right, we need also binding rules, hence the the directive on activation. I think that at some point you need to also allow for us to hope that some of the initiatives that are already on the table are are helping, like the minimum wage directive, for example, which is an important tool. Some of these tools we need to allow them to to function and to deliver. And I think that the road is ahead. The road is ahead in the next two or three years, all the list of all the deliverables that we have proposed, need also negotiating the recommendation on homelessness.
They all need our political support, the trust that they that they are that they are important in how we fight poverty. It is a journey. We are at the beginning of this journey. So of course, I think it will help us in negotiations on budget. It cannot not help us.
But we need to do this I think together and in this trio, Parliament and Commission need to create this very important partnership in in also engaging with member states so that in the end this battle remains central to the political agenda and not secondary. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, Executive Vice-President, and thank you also to all the members for this I think very important discussion. And as as you know, I know that you know and as you also sense from this discussion, we really have shared objectives. So we also of course need to work together to to make sure that we can make the objectives reality and our committee is very committed to that. So thank you very much. We will then move on to the last point on the agenda, which is the consideration of a draft opinion and amendments to the opinion on the Commission's proposal on establishing the EFRD including for Interreg and the Cohesion Fund as part of the fund set out in the NRP regulation and establishing conditions for the implementation of the Union support to regional development from 2028 to 2034.
And I will start by inviting the rapporteur, Mr. Oliveira, to take the floor for five minutes.
João Oliveira
Obrigado, Presidente.
Na apresentação deste projeto de opinião da Comissão do Emprego e Assuntos Sociais sobre os fundos destinados ao desenvolvimento regional, que integrarão o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual, gostava de sublinhar alguns dos aspetos essenciais, naturalmente não sendo possível fazer uma apresentação mais exaustiva do conjunto de alterações que são apontadas, mas queria começar por sublinhar uma questão que nos parece absolutamente essencial sublinhar de início. Estamos a tratar de uma opinião da Comissão do Emprego e Assuntos Sociais sobre uma matéria que, naturalmente, tem uma dimensão muito significativa naquilo que é a composição, as componentes da coesão entendidas não apenas no sentido territorial, mas também do ponto de vista da coesão económica e social. E, portanto, apresentamos um conjunto de propostas de alteração ao regulamento do FEDER e do Fundo de Coesão, integrando também o Interreg, que procuram corresponder a uma política que dê prioridade ao direcionamento destes fundos, destes recursos financeiros, ao apoio a medidas que visem a promoção do emprego de qualidade, o acesso a serviços públicos de qualidade, o combate à pobreza e à exclusão social, a oferta de habitação acessível e a elevação das condições de trabalho. Parece-nos que estes são eixos absolutamente essenciais que devem estruturar este regulamento, considerando que a dinamização económica ao nível regional é um aspeto fundamental para a correção das assimetrias regionais e para um desenvolvimento económico, social e territorial integrado. Por isso, no conjunto das propostas que apresentamos, colocamos o foco na necessidade de mobilização destes recursos financeiros para dar resposta às necessidades económicas e sociais dos Estados-Membros, em particular nas regiões mais desfavorecidas, nas zonas rurais, nas zonas despovoadas, insulares ou isoladas de outra forma, porque, naturalmente, aí as questões e as necessidades sociais fazem-se sentir com maior acuidade.
Queria sublinhar três aspetos ou três dimensões em relação aos quais há maior incidência das propostas que apresentamos. Em relação às questões do emprego, realçamos a necessidade de os fundos de política de coesão apoiarem a melhoria do acesso ao emprego, o combate ao desemprego, à precariedade e à pobreza, destacando o peso destes problemas, particularmente em relação à situação da juventude, apontando também a necessidade de mobilizar estes recursos para a elevação das condições de trabalho, com todos os instrumentos que estão associados, nomeadamente a valorização da contratação coletiva e a intervenção absolutamente essencial no plano sindical para a melhoria das condições de trabalho e a garantia dos direitos laborais. Na dimensão relacionada com os serviços públicos, destacamos a necessidade de mobilização destes recursos financeiros não apenas para reforçar a capacidade de resposta dos serviços públicos como elemento absolutamente essencial para garantir a coesão na dimensão económica e social, mas com o destaque que tem de ser dado para as regiões em situação de particular desfavor em função do seu isolamento ou do seu caráter ultraperiférico. Sublinhamos, neste âmbito, a necessidade do investimento que é preciso assegurar em matérias como as da educação, da saúde, do desenvolvimento da rede de creches, de educação pré-escolar e cuidados infantis, do investimento em redes de equipamentos de apoio a idosos, de infraestruturas e de cuidados adaptados a pessoas com deficiência, do investimento no âmbito da cultura e do desporto, das redes de água e saneamento, da energia e comunicações e transportes públicos.
Naturalmente não aprofundando alguns destes aspetos porque eles correspondem a elementos de competência de outras comissões, não deixamos de fazer alguma referência que é absolutamente essencial para que haja essa compreensão integrada e global desta necessidade no âmbito do desenvolvimento regional. Em relação às questões da habitação, apontamos a necessidade de mobilização de recursos financeiros para garantir a resposta às necessidades da habitação, particularmente com o enfoque na necessidade de expansão e requalificação dos parques habitacionais públicos, da promoção da construção a custos controlados e sem fins lucrativos, da dinamização dos setores social e cooperativo na construção como instrumentos para garantir o direito à habitação digna e acessível para todos, naturalmente identificando algumas necessidades de maior urgência que se colocam em relação nomeadamente à necessidade de combater a situação das pessoas em situação de sem-abrigo. Queria por fim dizer o seguinte: apontamos também a ideia da consideração destes fundos da política de coesão fora do âmbito da regulamentação dos planos nacionais e regionais de parceria, à semelhança daquilo que já foi proposto pela comissão, por esta Comissão de Emprego e Assuntos Sociais relativamente ao Fundo Social Europeu, e queria dizer que não incluímos das alterações a este regulamento as propostas que já apresentámos noutro âmbito relativo aos montantes globais destes fundos, mas consideramos que essa discussão não deve estar de alguma forma limitada ou proibida no âmbito da Comissão de Emprego e Assuntos Sociais, porque naturalmente esse pode ser também um contributo a dar a partir da nossa comissão.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, and then to the shadow rapporteurs for two minutes each, starting with Mrs. Princi from EPP.
Giusi Princi
Grazie, Presidente. Parlerò in italiano. Desidero innanzitutto ringraziare il relatore per lo spirito costruttivo che ha dimostrato in questa prima fase su un dossier importante come lui ha evidenziato per il futuro della politica di coesione. Tuttavia il PPE, per il PPE l'impostazione generale del progetto di parere presenta un limite politico chiaro: tende a leggere la coesione soprattutto come strumento di compensazione e di redistribuzione. È una prospettiva che non condividiamo pienamente perché rischia di ridurre una delle principali politiche europee di investimento territoriale a una logica prevalentemente assistenziale.
Per noi la coesione non è solo una correzione dei divari: è costruzione di capacità, crescita, competitività, lavoro, capitale umano, servizi essenziali e possibilità concreta per i territori di esprimere il proprio potenziale. È questa la linea che come PPE riteniamo debba emergere con maggior chiarezza anche nel parere di EMPL. Una politica di coesione efficace deve partire dalla realtà delle regioni europee che non hanno tutti gli stessi problemi, le stesse strutture economiche o la stessa capacità amministrativa. Servono quindi strumenti flessibili, fondi con funzioni chiare e interventi capaci di produrre risultati concreti per le persone e per le comunità locali. In questa prospettiva FESR, Fondo di Coesione e Interreg devono mantenere la propria specificità.
Le sinergie sono utili ma non devono creare confusione tra strumenti diversi. La flessibilità serve se rafforza l'efficacia delle politiche, non se ne indebolisce l'identità dei fondi. Alcuni passaggi del progetto di parere vanno nella giusta direzione. Penso agli emendamenti 3, 6 e 7, ma anche agli emendamenti 28 e 32. Elementi importanti ma certamente non sufficienti per il PPE che attraverso gli emendamenti presentati mira a riequilibrare il testo dentro una vera prospettiva EMPL: ridurre la politica di coesione alla sua funzione più piena, non solo territoriale ma anche occupazionale e sociale, rafforzando il legame tra sviluppo dei territori, lavoro di qualità, competenze e partecipazione al mercato del lavoro.
E su questa base che intendiamo contribuire al lavoro sul parere.
Grazie.
Nora Mebarek
Merci, Madame la Présidente. D'abord, je voulais commencer par remercier notre rapporteur, Monsieur Oliveira, pour la qualité de son travail sur ce dossier. Je pense que tout le monde en conviendra, la politique de cohésion fonctionne. Le taux de chômage dans les États membres ayant rejoint l'Union européenne en 2004 est passé de 13 à 4 %. L'intervention des fonds de cohésion devrait permettre la création de 1,3 million d'emplois supplémentaires d'ici 2027.
Pour chaque euro du budget européen investi, nous devrions en récupérer trois supplémentaires d'ici 2043. C'est un investissement pour notre avenir. C'est la raison pour laquelle la proposition de la Commission est d'autant plus difficile à comprendre. Car c'est bien de cela qu'il s'agit. Le nouveau règlement a été vidé de sa substance, ses objectifs, ses règles, ses garanties.
Et tout a été reversé pour un plan national qui mélange des fonds qui n'ont ni la même vocation, ni la même base juridique, ni la même logique territoriale. Alors que la politique de cohésion repose aujourd'hui sur un lien direct entre les régions et l'Union européenne, leur rôle deviendrait purement et simplement marginal. La seule garantie prévue dans ce texte concerne les régions les moins développées, mais ne prévoit rien pour celles en transition ou pour les RUP. Ce n'est pas de la simplification, c'est un recul. Or demain, en l'état actuel du texte, les ressources qui finançaient des hôpitaux, des logements sociaux, des infrastructures d'accueil pour des personnes en situation de vulnérabilité pourraient être redirigées vers d'autres priorités.
C'est tout simplement inacceptable. Pour notre part, nous défendrons un texte ambitieux, des garanties...
Nora Mebarek
Okay. Je reprends. Pour notre part, c'est le plus important, nous défendrons un texte ambitieux, des garanties sur le budget, le cofinancement, le fléchage social et le logement abordable. Sur les régions ultrapériphériques en particulier, ce qui est proposé pour le moment est notoirement insuffisant au regard de leurs contraintes structurelles. Nous attendons des avancées concrètes sur ces points.
Lors de la récente adoption de son mandat de négociation dans le cadre du financier pluriannuel, notre Parlement a déjà tranché en faveur de ces différents points. Cette feuille de route doit être concrétisée dans ce texte. Le groupe socialiste et démocrate aborde ces négociations avec un esprit constructif, mais nous serons intransigeants sur l'essentiel. Ce règlement doit avoir une portée normative réelle avec des garanties concrètes. Le Parlement européen a rejeté toute renationalisation de la politique de cohésion.
Les travailleurs, les familles et les territoires qui dépendent de ces fonds attendent de nous que nous tenions cette ligne. Et alors que des interrogations sérieuses pèsent sur l'avenir même de la gestion de cette politique au sein de la Commission, notre responsabilité est d'autant plus grande. Ce n'est pas le moment de reculer et nous ne reculerons pas. Merci.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, Mrs. Didier, speaking on behalf of Mrs. Dorsy. Yes.
Mélanie Disdier
Merci, Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le rapporteur. Donc face à la refonte de l'architecture budgétaire européenne et à la création des plans de partenariat nationaux et régionaux, les PNR, notre groupe souhaite aborder ce sujet avec une approche constructive. Nous le disons clairement, nous ne sommes pas opposés par principe à la simplification administrative ni à la fusion de certaines enveloppes si cela permet concrètement de faire des économies de fonctionnement et d'alléger les procédures pour nos acteurs locaux. Cependant, cette volonté de rationalisation ne doit en aucun cas servir de phoné à un chantage politique inacceptable.
Pour nous, la ligne rouge absolue, c'est la conditionnalité. Nous refusons catégoriquement de basculer vers ce modèle de financement dit à la performance, ce fameux cash for reforms, directement calqué sur le plan de relance post-COVID. Le versement des fonds européens qui est vital pour le développement de nos territoires ne doit pas être pris en otage et strictement conditionné à la réalisation de réformes macroéconomiques ou structurelles imposées par la Commission européenne. C'est pourquoi nous soutenons et porterons toutes les démarches visant à dispenser nos fonds régionaux, à commencer par le programme Interreg et le fonds de cohésion, de cette conditionnalité technocratique liée au PNR. Nous devons préserver un suivi transparent basé sur le coût réel avec des pistes d'audit simplifiées.
Oui à la simplification. Oui à une plus grande liberté pour les États membres de flécher les fonds selon les réalités de terrain, mais non à la mise sous tutelle de nos nations. Je vous remercie.
Chiara Gemma
Grazie Presidente, intervengo per conto della collega Alexandrakis. La politica di coesione non può diventare uno slogan di circostanza mentre intere regioni vengono nei fatti progressivamente indebolite. Se l'Europa prende sul serio la coesione, allora deve smettere di parlare in termini astratti e iniziare a rispondere a ciò che sta realmente accadendo sui vari territori. Per noi questo significa una sola cosa: la politica di coesione deve sostenere sia i lavoratori sia le imprese. Deve tutelare un'occupazione stabile e dignitosa, ma deve anche rafforzare le piccole e medie imprese, l'imprenditorialità, l'apprendistato e i settori produttivi locali.
Senza un'economia reale non esistono posti di lavoro reali e senza posti di lavoro reali non può esistere coesione sociale. Troppe regioni non si limitano semplicemente ad affrontare delle sfide, stanno subendo un vero e proprio depauperamento. Perdono giovani, perdono imprese, perdono forza lavoro e perdono la capacità di rimanere economicamente e socialmente sostenibili. Alle aree remote, insulari, di confine e soggette a spopolamento non si può chiedere di sopportare svantaggi strutturali permettendo di ricevere in cambio soltanto formulazioni politiche generiche. Per questo motivo il testo in esame deve essere più diretto, più attento alle specificità territoriali e più realistico.
Deve riconoscere la debolezza dei mercati del lavoro, la fuga dei cervelli, le pressioni sul mercato abitativo, la carenza dei servizi, la stagionalità e il declino demografico come questioni centrali della politica di coesione. La politica di coesione non dovrebbe allora limitarsi a gestire il declino, dovrebbe invertirne la tendenza, dovrebbe aiutare le persone a restare, lavorare, investire, produrre e costruire il proprio futuro nelle comunità in cui vivono. Se questa legislazione vuole avere un significato concreto deve difendere le regioni più esposte, rafforzare sia l'attività economica sia la stabilità sociale e smettere di trattare le disuguaglianze territoriali europee come un problema risolvibile soltanto attraverso formulazioni vaghe e generiche. Grazie.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that wishes to take the floor? Mr. Ondruš.
Branislav Ondruš
The title of this point of agenda includes word establishing conditions for the implementation of the Union support. And therefore I would like to stress that what is important is not just to talk about the amounts money, about the allocations for particular purposes, but also about the conditions which will be connected with the implementation of this financial support. If we are speaking, for example, about the necessity to finance affordable housing, it's not enough for me. Let's include to the obligations of Member States to prioritize non-profit housing projects, like housing cooperatives, like publicly owned housing project, etc., etc., because there are many very good and working examples across Europe available that housing cooperatives work very well and can and through through this way we can achieve the goals in a field of affordable housing. Also, if we speak about necessity to to invest to the requalifications, educational programs for for adult, it's okay, but it is not enough for me.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Let's make sure that employers will be obliged to allocate working time for education and training of of workers which will be paid by European funds, etc., etc. So what I want to stress and in that direction I will also provide some some particular amendments, what I want to stress is that let's focus not just allocation of funds, but also on conditions and let's make that every euro which will be spent in next under the next multi-financial multi-annual financial framework will be spent with real social positive social impact. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you and I will now invite the representative of the Commission, Mrs. Anna Wagner, who is head of unit for policy development and evaluation at DG REGIO for the next three minutes.
Anna Wagner
Thank you very much, Chair, and good evening to all honorable members. From the perspective of the ERDF Cohesion Fund proposal, I just wanted to recall that basically the treaty objective of the fund in terms of reducing regional disparities is something that is pursued in a wider context of the national and regional partnership plan proposal construct and that in order to fully pursue the overall framework what is set forward by the Commission proposal, one needs to take the two proposals into account and notably when it comes to a number of simplification objectives by pooling together funding, which also enhances synergies across the funding resources and that also enhances the flexibility of deploying the funding, these rules are preponderantly set out in the NRP proposal and the same goes for elements that concern multi-level governance, partnership, the involvement of regions and also the definition and the way to deal with the three categories of regions and notably the focus on the less developed regions with earmarked resources as well as the expectation and assessment criteria in terms of how the specific needs of specific territories are going to be addressed in the plans, for which first time compared to the last programming periods, we have a dedicated annex, Annex VII, which precisely sets forward these criteria.
The ERDF Cohesion Fund proposal is something that completes by providing further steer and emphasis to certain areas, notably the disadvantaged areas when it comes to those that are in demographic decline, rural areas, eastern border regions, islands, etc., and these geographical areas resonate a lot with the elements that have been put forward in the draft opinion, for which I wanted to thank the rapporteur and the shadows. When it comes to considerations on sustainable urban development or the outermost regions, the ERDF Cohesion proposal also sets certain additional considerations and specific implementation rules and modalities when it comes to the Interreg. Having gone through the elements proposed in the draft opinion, I wanted to highlight one element to which I suggest that the committee is attentive to, and that is not to turn certain aims and policy ambitions into some sort of eligibility conditions and wordings that are to meant set specific rules for the use of these funds, because that might create certain rigidities and difficulties for the objective of or against the objective of flexible deployment. I gave as an example the housing-related elements. On this, I wanted to thank for the opportunity to share the Commission thinking on these elements.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, and now for the closing remarks by the rapporteur, Mr. Oliveira, for the last three minutes.
João Oliveira
Obrigado, presidente, quero agradecer as palavras, os comentários, a apreciação que foi feita da proposta que desde que apresentámos. Queria dizer que no essencial, naquilo que foram as posições assumidas por cada um dos relatores sombra, não encontro elementos de contradição relativamente ao sentido das propostas que adiantámos. Julgo que as questões que foram referidas por cada um dos grupos políticos como questões relevantes a serem consideradas, cada um dos grupos e cada um dos deputados como questões relevantes a serem consideradas, julgo que têm possibilidade de ser consideradas na discussão que naturalmente teremos que teremos ainda que fazer. Há alguns aspetos que eu julgo que nós precisamos de facto de os enquadrar na discussão mais geral que temos feito sobre a proposta do próximo quadro financeiro plurianual para o período 2028-2034. Particularmente as questões relacionadas com a estrutura e com a arquitetura do próximo QFP devem ser consideradas com a tradução que elas precisam de ter aqui.
Nós temos tido uma discussão na Comissão de Emprego e Assuntos Sociais a propósito destas questões, particularmente em relação à política de coesão, no sentido de que a política de coesão não deve estar de alguma forma condicionada ou enquadrada de uma forma que a secundarize e secundarize os objetivos da coesão económica, social e territorial face a outros objetivos. Isso já teve uma tradução concreta na ideia de que para que isso seja assim, os fundos devem ser autonomizados. E autonomizar os fundos da política de coesão não pode significar apenas inserir os seus montantes globais numa rubrica específica em termos de inscrição orçamental.
Isso implica também a sua própria autonomização em relação à regulamentação. E por isso é proposto nestas propostas, e por isso propusemos neste projeto, essa autonomização dos fundos destinados à política, a suportar a política de coesão relativamente aos planos nacionais e regionais de parceria. Foram aqui abordadas também as questões relacionadas com a condicionalidade. Há de facto uma referência às questões da condicionalidade social neste projeto que apresentamos, porque parece-nos que a utilização dos fundos para o desenvolvimento regional deve estar condicionada ao cumprimento, ao respeito pelos direitos económicos, sociais, laborais que se procura salvaguardar como aspeto essencial do desenvolvimento regional. Alguns outros aspetos que foram referidos, quer a propósito do desenvolvimento das economias locais, a propósito das questões da habitação, parece-nos que são perfeitamente compatíveis com o enquadramento que fizemos neste projeto de posição da Comissão de Emprego e Assuntos Sociais.
E portanto esperamos que na fase de discussão dos compromissos seja possível alcançar soluções que visem esses objetivos que aqui foram referidos e que naturalmente também partilhamos.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much and with those words I also say thank you very much for this day. This is the end of the committee meeting and our next meeting is tomorrow morning, the joint EMPL-SANT meeting, so see you there.
Agnes Jongerius
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. First of all, I would like to check the quorum.
We need 14 members to be present in the room to have a quorum. I see that we have enough members present, so we can start our meeting. The first item on our agenda is the adoption of the draft agenda. Are there any comments or objections to the draft agenda? I see none, so the agenda is adopted.
The second item is the approval of the minutes of the meetings of the 2nd and 3rd of October 2023. Are there any comments or objections to these minutes? I see none, so the minutes are approved. The third item is the Chair's announcements. I would like to inform you that the interpretation is available in all the official languages of the European Union, except for Irish and Maltese.
I would also like to remind you that the meeting is being webstreamed. The fourth item is the report on ongoing interinstitutional negotiations. I would like to give the floor to the rapporteurs to update us on the progress of their files. First, I would like to give the floor to Mr. Radtke for the file on the European Health Data Space.
Dennis Radtke
Thank you, Chair. I would like to inform the committee that we had our first trilogue on the European Health Data Space last week. The meeting was very constructive, and we managed to reach a preliminary agreement on several technical issues. However, there are still some political issues that need to be resolved, such as the governance of the data space and the protection of personal data. We have scheduled several technical meetings for the coming weeks, and we hope to reach a final agreement by the end of the year.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Radtke. Now I would like to give the floor to Ms. Jongerius for the file on the platform work directive.
Agnes Jongerius
Thank you, Chair. I would like to update the committee on the progress of the negotiations on the platform work directive. We had our third trilogue yesterday, and I must say that the negotiations are quite difficult. There are still significant differences between the Parliament and the Council on several key issues, such as the legal presumption of employment and the criteria for determining the employment status of platform workers. We are working hard to find a compromise that will ensure a high level of protection for platform workers while also providing legal certainty for platforms.
We have another trilogue scheduled for next week, and I hope that we will be able to make some progress. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Jongerius. The fifth item on our agenda is the presentation of the study on the social impact of the green transition. I would like to welcome our experts who will present the findings of their study. The floor is yours.
Dennis Radtke
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for the opportunity to present our study to the EMPL committee. Our study focuses on the social impact of the green transition in the European Union, with a particular emphasis on the impact on employment and social inclusion. We have found that the green transition will have a significant impact on the labor market, with some sectors experiencing job losses while others will see job creation. It is therefore crucial to ensure that the transition is just and inclusive, and that workers are provided with the necessary skills and support to adapt to the changes. We have also identified several policy recommendations to mitigate the negative social impacts of the green transition, such as the strengthening of social protection systems and the promotion of lifelong learning.
Thank you for your attention.
Stellen Sie eine Frage zu diesem Video – ich analysiere das Transkript, um Ihnen zu antworten.