Doslovný záznam ze zasedání

Čtvrtek, 15. září 2016 - Štrasburk

7. Činnosti, dopad a přidaná hodnota Evropského fondu pro přizpůsobení se globalizaci za období 2007 až 2014 (rozprava)

  Πρόεδρος. – Το επόμενο σημείο στην ημερήσια διάταξη είναι η συζήτηση επί της έκθεσης της Marian Harkin, εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής Απασχόλησης και Κοινωνικών Υποθέσεων, σχετικά με τις δραστηριότητες, τον αντίκτυπο και την προστιθέμενη αξία του Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου Προσαρμογής στην Παγκοσμιοποίηση κατά το διάστημα μεταξύ 2007 και 2014 (2015/2284(INI)) (A8-0227/2016)

  Marian Harkin, rapporteur. – Mr President, first of all, I want to genuinely thank colleagues for the really good and constructive cooperation in this report, and also all the shadows and all the committees who contributed excellent opinions. I just might mention, in particular, our colleague Jean-Paul Denanot from the Committee on Budgets.

I suppose our role here was to assess the activities, the impact and the added-value of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) and, of course, to look to the future, to indicate what our proposals are for a more effective and more efficient EGF. I am grateful to colleagues for the engagement. The EGF is small fund compared to the ESF, for example; it is also a new fund. I think that gives us a sense that we can help to shape it in a positive way. In this report we look to see: how we can help to make it more effective; what partnership models will deliver better outcomes for redundant workers who have lost their jobs due to globalisation; how we can organise the process so that it responds in a more timely way to the needs of workers; how we can ensure better value for money for both the workers and for EU taxpayers; and how we can spend that money in a more efficient way; how can we ensure we have relevant data that allows us to assess the outcomes from the funds without placing undue requirements on Member States; and, of course, crucially, how we can help ensure personalised, well-coordinated measures that are tailored to the individual needs of the redundant workers. In that way we do two things: we express our solidarity with them at a difficult time and, secondly, we assist them in the transition to sustainable employment.

So what makes the EGF different to the ESF? Well, the EGF is meant to deal with emergencies, more short-term in its approach, while the ESF is more structural. Both have their advantages, and indeed it has been very positive to see how Member States use the ESF as a complementary tool to the EGF. We also propose that Member States need to achieve synergies between EGF and ESI funds. We emphasize that ESI funds can act as follow-up measures in EGF areas of support by stimulating investment and overall job creation. So what are the positives? Well, timelines have improved considerably due to efforts by all actors: the Commission, Member States, Parliament, etc. The self-employed are now included. NEETs can benefit from EGF support in numbers equal to the numbers of targeted beneficiaries. The EGF is now part of the shared fund management system, and I commend the Commission on this. Co-funding has been increased to 60%, more Member States are using EGF and spending, under personalised measures, has been lowered to 35%. Indeed, in many recent applications that spending is considerably less.

The Court of Auditors tells us that nearly all EGF beneficiaries were able to benefit from personalised and well-coordinated measures. The re-employment rate is around 50%, and as Member States become more used to the fund, their applications are more timely. But there are still negatives: Member States don’t use the EGF often enough and, crucially, do not often use the derogation. Funding has been cut from 500 million to 150 million, budget implementation is only 55% but improving. There is a concentration of applications in the manufacturing, automotive construction and aviation sectors. We need to take a different approach to NEETs and to redundant workers. So it is important to design the EGF in such a way that it can respond to their needs. The Member States need to make publicly available all relevant information in regard to EGF cases, and they need to set quantitive reintegration objectives so that we can measure the success.

Finally, the most important point is that the EGF must guarantee EU added-value for redundant workers and taxpayers. Then we can strongly call for its continuation and expansion.

  Jean-Paul Denanot, rapporteur pour avis de la commission des budgets. – Monsieur le Président, effectivement, en tant que rapporteur sur l'évaluation du Fonds d'ajustement à la mondialisation au titre de la commission des budgets, j'ai rencontré beaucoup de parties prenantes, des entreprises, des salariés, des syndicats, des accompagnateurs de reclassement, des administrations.

Tous m'ont dit trois choses. La première, c'est que ce fonds est très utile pour ne pas laisser les salariés sans solution à la suite de leur licenciement. Deuxièmement, le fonds intervient de fait a posteriori et les procédures devraient être accélérées. Troisièmement, et je pense que c'est le plus important, il serait sans doute préférable d'être dans la prévention que dans la réparation.

C'est pourquoi je plaide pour une anticipation des mutations engendrées à la fois par la mondialisation, les mutations technologiques, les mutations commerciales dans le monde aussi. Je pense qu'il faut aujourd'hui que la Commission prenne en compte cette dimension et fasse des propositions pour que nous puissions, nous au niveau européen, accompagner les entreprises dans ces mutations. Je pense qu'il y a là de véritables perspectives, notamment pour les PME qui, avec cet accompagnement, éviteraient d'aller dans le mur, comme c'est le cas actuellement.

  Marianne Thyssen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all I would like to thank the rapporteur, Ms Harkin, and the rapporteur for the Committee on Budgets, Mr Denanot, for the attention they have paid to the EGF since it started in 2007, in Ms Harkin’s case.

The report is very useful to us. Indeed, despite several improvements introduced in the regulation for the 2014-2020 period and subsequently reflected in the functioning of the Fund, there is still a margin for additional fine-tuning. The EGF is an emergency instrument with its own role. I share your view that in its current shape and budget, the EGF cannot be an intervention tool for job losses as a possible result of EU trade agreements.

Some of the issues highlighted in the conclusions of the Court of Auditors report and the evaluation of the EGF have already been addressed in the current regulation, for example, the use of EGF funding to compensate national workers’ income support schemes with no European added value. The former lengthy EGF approval procedure has been reduced from 41 weeks on average to a maximum now of 28 weeks.

I welcome your appreciation for the Commission’s efforts to develop standardised procedures for the EGF applications and management using the functionalities of the electronic data exchange system, SFC. Since 3 August 2016, the reporting module for EGF cases is also available in SFC and I am confident that the expectations regarding reporting improvement will be fulfilled once SFC becomes fully operational for EGF cases.

We expect the first results of the ongoing EGF mid-term evaluation for the 2014-2020 period by the end of this year. They will cover the current derogation giving access to EGF co—funding also to NEETs in certain EGF applications. The average share of beneficiaries aged 55 or more was three times that of beneficiaries aged 15 to 24. The inclusion of NEETs as eligible beneficiaries of Globalisation Fund support in the current EGF regulation by way of derogation helps to counterbalance this tendency and is an expression of solidarity with young unemployed persons in regions with high unemployment levels. The Commission shares your view that the EGF should continue to provide assistance to NEETs who live in regions eligible under the Youth Employment Initiative after December 2017, the date of expiry of the derogation. I am happy to announce that the Commission just yesterday tabled a proposal for the extension of this derogation as part of the mid—term review of the multiannual financial framework.

I take note of your concern that workers made redundant by SMEs have fewer chances to be supported by the EGF than workers made redundant by large enterprises. However, applying for EGF co—funding in support of workers made redundant by large enterprises or SMEs belongs to national preferences. Some Member States apply this almost exclusively using the intervention criteria of Article 4.1(a). Other Member States, for example Spain, apply it mainly using the intervention criteria of Article 4.1(b), that cover cases of at least 500 workers being made redundant, particularly in SMEs all operating in the same sector and located in one or two contiguous regions.

I would like to recall that the Commission has promoted regular peer reviews across national exchanges or partnering in order to exchange good practices and implementing experience since the start of the Fund. The meetings of the EGF contact persons that the Commission organises twice a year are an established way for Member States to exchange best practices. We will further support the sharing of information so that mutual learning among Member States here, too, is reinforced.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI
Vicepresidente

  Agnes Jongerius, rapporteur voor advies van INTA. – Net in tijden van economische stagnatie en toegenomen globalisering is het belangrijk dat we serieus opkomen voor mensen die aan het kortste eind trekken. De baten van handel zorgen altijd voor verschuivingen in welvaart. De verliezers hebben dan ook reden tot klagen als ze niet meedelen in de groei die handel met zich meebrengt. Daarvoor zijn natuurlijk in de eerste plaats de lidstaten verantwoordelijk. Maar voor het opvangen van schokken en voor de solidariteit tussen lidstaten is het EFG een heel belangrijk fonds. Daarom hoop ik dat de Commissie dit verslag ter harte neemt, met in het bijzonder de aanbevelingen van de INTA-commissie, namelijk dat bij handelsverdragen van tevoren en na afloop moet worden gekeken naar het verlies aan werkgelegenheid en dat werknemers tijdig betrokken moeten worden bij de herstructureringsplannen van bedrijven, zodat zij in staat zijn om serieus te onderhandelen over het bijbehorend sociaal plan. Ik hoop dat op die manier het EFG verbeterd kan worden en behulpzaam kan zijn voor de verliezers van de globalisering.

  Marco Valli, relatore per parere della commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la mancanza di dati completi ci rende difficile capire se il Fondo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione sia stato finora uno strumento efficace. Per questo motivo, è necessario che in futuro la Commissione garantisca l'accesso del pubblico a tutti i documenti relativi ai casi di intervento del Fondo e fornisca informazioni complete per permettere di capire se la formazione offerta sia stata adeguata alle prospettive economiche e alle esigenze del mercato del lavoro nelle regioni interessate dai licenziamenti e quali siano stati i risultati previsti e conseguiti.

Soprattutto, è necessario avere la possibilità di capire se le chiusure delle aziende e gli esuberi siano conseguenza di una delocalizzazione della produzione in paesi terzi o in altri Stati membri che applicano politiche aggressive fiscali per attrarre gli investimenti. È importante che non siano i cittadini a pagare per la smania di profitto delle società, per questo chiediamo che la Commissione valuti uno strumento che obblighi le aziende che spostano la produzione fuori dall'UE a contribuire alle misure di reinserimento per i lavoratori in esubero.

  Tamás Deutsch, a Regionális Fejlesztési Bizottság véleményének előadója. – Elnök Úr! A Regionális Fejlesztési Bizottság véleményének felelőseként elsőként arra szeretném felhívni a figyelmet, hogy az Európai Globalizációs Alkalmazkodási Alap, és az Európai Strukturális és Befektetési Alapok közötti szinergiák kihasználása nélkülözhetetlen a gyors, tartós és hatékony eredményekhez. A kohéziós politika jelentős mértékben járult hozzá a válság és a globalizáció negatív gazdasági és társadalmi hatásainak mérsékléséhez, és elősegítette a fenntartható foglalkoztatást és növekedést.

Ahhoz, hogy a munkanélküliségre tartós megoldásokat találjunk, a szinergiák kihasználására, több forrás együttes használatára van szükség. Szeretném továbbá felhívni a figyelmet, hogy az Európai Globalizációs Alkalmazkodási Alap kérelmeinek átlagos jóváhagyási időszaka a jelentésben vizsgált időszakban 10 hónap volt, ez pedig elfogadtathatatlan. Minden olyan intézkedés, amely ezen kérelmek elbírálásának az időszakát rövidíti, fontos, ezeket szorgalmaztuk.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Moterų teisių ir lyčių lygybės komiteto nuomonės referentė. –Europos globalizacijos fondas išties pasitarnavo darbo netekusiems žmonėms visoje Europoje, jo parama buvo labai reikšminga, ypač ekonominės ir finansų krizės laikotarpiu, kuomet daugumoje šalių narių skirtingi pramonės sektoriai patyrė didelius sunkumus ir žmonės masiškai neteko darbo. Štai mano gimtojoje Lietuvoje keturi sektoriai pasinaudojo šio fondo parama – statybų, tekstilės, elektronikos ir baldų gamybos sektoriai. Ir tai mūsų nedidelei darbo rinkai ir jos atsigavimui reiškė iš tikrųjų labai daug. Kaip Moterų teisių ir lyčių lygybės komiteto nuomonės teikėja, šiame pranešime noriu pažymėti, kad tik trečdalis fondo paramos gavėjų vertinamu laikotarpiu buvo moterys. Žinoma, greičiausiai tai susiję su tuo, jog globalizacija bei finansų ir ekonominė krizė labiau palietė tuos sektorius, kuriose daugiausiai dirba vyrai, tačiau noriu paprašyti Komisijos vis dėl to stebėti, kad moterys skirstant fondo paramą nenukentėtų, kad darbo netekusioms moterims teikiamas suderintas individualių paslaugų paketas būtų išties priderintas jų realiems poreikiams. Taip pat ragina valstybes nares rinkti duomenis pagal lytį, kad galėtume geriau įvertinti moterų grįžimo į darbo rinką rodiklius, stebėti į kokius sektorius jos grįžta. Ypač svarbu žinoti, ar moterys randa kokybiškai saugų darbą ir ar vienodai yra skatinamas jų verslumas.

  Csaba Sógor, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, as we concluded yesterday during the debate on the latest cases of job losses, at Caterpillar and Alstom, there can be no substitute for a long-term vision for the reindustrialisation of Europe. That being said, in our global world there can always be unforeseen forces – such as structural changes in world trade patterns, financial crises or a slowdown of growth in Europe or elsewhere, affecting demand – that can hit our industries and our workers.

It is thus essential that we have a reliable EU-level cushion to protect our workers from such a blow. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund has already proved its worth in this regard in many unfortunate cases of plant closure in Europe, especially through the support it has provided for thousands of lower-skilled, and thus more vulnerable, workers in regaining employment. This report not only offers a comprehensive evaluation of the fund’s strengths and weaknesses but it also succeeds in identifying many ways to make it more efficient in the future.

I would like to thank the rapporteur for this and for our great collaboration.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Tibor Szanyi (S&D), Kékkártyás kérdés. – Tisztelt Képviselő Úr! Többé-kevésbé egyetértek azokkal, amiket Ön mondott, viszont egy aspektusra szeretnék rákérdezni az Ön véleményét megtudakolandó: nevezetesen, hogy a most éppen csetlő-botló TTIP tárgyalások során Ön látja-e, hogy maga az egyezmény kellő védelmet ad a szociális jogok tekintetében, szemben azzal, hogy ha esetleg mégsem, akkor ugyanennek az alapnak kell majd egyszer működésbe lépnie.

  Csaba Sógor (PPE), kékkártyás válasz. – Szociális kérdésekben hasonlóan vélekedünk, ugyanilyen aggodalommal tekintünk mi is erre.

  Maria Arena, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, je remercie Marian Harkin pour le travail qu'elle a réalisé ainsi que les corapporteurs, et je tiens aussi à remercier la commissaire pour l'annonce qu'elle a faite hier en disant que les NEET seraient effectivement prolongés au niveau du Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation. Je la remercie pour l'action qu'elle a menée.

Le FEM permet effectivement d'aider les travailleurs qui ont perdu leur emploi en raison de modifications majeures de la structure commerciale mondiale. Il est donc évident que, dans un contexte de globalisation tel que nous le vivons aujourd'hui, nous devons défendre cet instrument, voire le renforcer, car tout le monde sait qu'il y a des gagnants à la globalisation, mais il y a aussi de plus en plus de perdants.

Je plaide donc pour plus de moyens, mais aussi pour augmenter les niveaux d'intervention et pour activer la clause de circonstances exceptionnelles afin de pouvoir moduler les aides en fonction des besoins sur le terrain.

Je plaide aussi pour plus de prévention et je suis un peu interpellée par ce que Mme Thyssen vient de dire. Elle dit que le Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation ne doit pas venir compenser les politiques commerciales. Or, Mme Malmström dit l'inverse. Dans sa politique générale, Mme Malmström a inscrit qu'il faut avoir recours au Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation pour compenser les effets négatifs du commerce. Ce qui est particulièrement interpellant, c'est que, dans le cadre des études d'impact en matière de commerce, Mme Malmström dit qu'il n'y a pas d'effets négatifs. Il est donc assez particulier d'entendre des discours divergents à ce point.

Dans le débat d'hier concernant l'Afrique, on a eu le même son de cloche: il n'y a pas d'effets négatifs sur l'agriculture. Or, on sait qu'il y a des effets négatifs. Si on les nie, on ne peut pas les anticiper. Je plaide pour qu'on les reconnaisse sincèrement et que l'on puisse effectivement anticiper ces effets négatifs pour aider l'industrie plutôt que d'aider des travailleurs qui ont perdu leur travail, quand il n'y a plus de possibilités pour eux.

  Enrique Calvet Chambon, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señor Presidente, de nuevo buenos días, la tercera vez que usted me escucha en este Pleno. Es un Pleno muy duro, supongo. Señora Comisaria, gracias por estar aquí. Quiero agradecer el trabajo que han hecho todos los ponentes alternativos y, cómo no, el excelente trabajo hecho por la ponente, la señora Harkin.

Voy a ir a los principios: todo shock asimétrico, toda evolución económica, todo cambio puntual precipitado genera épocas de transición; es una dinámica en la que va a haber ganadores y perdedores. Y la señora Arena tiene razón al decir que la ATCI, un gran cambio comercial, puede tener perdedores a corto plazo.

Lo bueno del modelo social europeo es que nos encargamos de apoyar y ayudar durante la transición a esos perdedores. En ese sentido, este Fondo es fundamental. Es fundamental reforzarlo y utilizarlo bien con un sentido de empleo, de recuperación y de reinclusión de las zonas desfavorecidas. Y, desde luego, yo metería a los «ninis», por ejemplo, entre los colectivos sociales que debemos recuperar.

Ahora bien, ¿qué problema puede tener este Fondo? Este Fondo a lo mejor debe hacerse un poquito más horizontal, porque el problema es cuando permite discriminar entre unas empresas u otras o entre unos sectores u otros. Tiene que mejorarse ese aspecto pero, sin duda alguna, nunca se puede renunciar a esa labor de la Comisión de ayudar a la coherencia social cuando la evolución económica impone perdedores.

  Lynn Boylan, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank Ms Harkin for her work on the report. To echo what some of colleagues have said, the EGF is a worthwhile and positive fund, and I support it. But this Fund is often used to compensate for the damaging effects of policies that have stemmed from the European Commission.

It has been the policies of deindustrialisation and unfettered free trade which in the main have created the need for the EGF. Not only have these policies caused job losses but their fallout has undermined workers’ rights and caused irreparable social damage. Within the report, I agree with the call for greater government transparency and the reference to a mid-term review at Member State level so that Member States can assess the progress of the EGF in their countries and identify issues early that might need intervention.

In many countries, such as my own, Ireland, there has been a severe underspend of EGF funds and it does not become apparent until the end of the term when the monies are handed back. This is unfair to workers as they are the ones that suffer when the funding is not put to the best use.

I also welcome the reference to creating stronger working conditions and working relationships with the community and voluntary sector, as they are the ones that are best placed to assess, particularly, the needs of NEETs, and to raise the awareness of EGF opportunities with them.

As I said, overall this is a very good report – and would again just like to thank Ms Harkin for her work in reaching consensus – and I will be supporting it.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Steven Woolfe (EFDD), blue-card question. – Ms Boylan, I firmly agree with the beginning of your analysis of the problems of the EGF. Do you also accept, or not, the principle that the very existence of the EGF allows executives at large corporations, when they are considering to make redundancies, know that they can reduce the redundancy values for people, know that they can sack more people – know that they can get away with all their policies because of the very existence of this EGF – and that if it was not there they would be forced by national states to pay proper funds to those people who are leaving?

  Lynn Boylan (GUE/NGL), blue-card answer. – I agree with the vast majority of what you have said, but obviously, as somebody who has been a trade union member for many years, my interests are with the workers. While I think we do need to do more to secure proper redundancy payments and proper collective bargaining for workers, in the absence of that, and without changing the direction of the European Union in relation to trade and to its relationship with multinational corporations who treat workers disgracefully, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund is the only thing that workers have – and that is why, reluctantly, I accept it because we need anything that we can get, particularly in Ireland, and I am sure in many other Member States, to help those workers get back into employment. However, I agree with you: we need to change the direction of the EU to deal with multinational corporations and their shocking treatment of workers.

  Monika Vana, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Auch ich möchte mich bei der Berichterstatterin Frau Harkin ausdrücklich für die außerordentlich konstruktive, gute und zielorientierte Zusammenarbeit bedanken. Für uns Grüne ist der Europäische Globalisierungsfonds ein wichtiges sozial- und arbeitsmarktpolitisches Steuerungsinstrument, wenn Menschen aufgrund der Folgen von Globalisierung oder Wirtschaftskrise ihren Job verlieren und in die Armutsfalle zu schlittern drohen. Es ist nämlich auch eines der wenigen Instrumente, mit denen die EU den Bürgern und Bürgerinnen direkt unter die Arme greift, wo nicht die Wirtschaft im Vordergrund steht, sondern der Mensch – so wie es einer Sozialunion, wie wir Grüne sie anstreben, würdig ist.

Wir Grüne werden daher dem vorliegenden Bericht zustimmen, wollen auch ausdrücklich darauf hinweisen, dass wir uns freuen, dass die Verankerung eines gender impact assessment in den Bericht aufgenommen wurde, also dass Frauen und Männer gleichermaßen kurz – und langfristig vom EGF profitieren. Und selbstverständlich darf der Fonds weder eine Lösung für eine fehlgeleitete Handelspolitik noch eine Lösung für falsche Konzernstrategien sein und auch kein Ersatz für Präventionsmaßnahmen, wie mein Vorredner Jean—Paul Denanot auch ganz richtig gesagt hat.

Jedenfalls hat aber der EGF auch großen Reformbedarf. Zum Beispiel sollten auch wirklich ArbeitnehmerInnen aller Mitgliedstaaten vom EGF profitieren können, nicht nur die am besten informierten, nicht nur die in den großen Konzernen. Auch die Qualität der Arbeitsplätze sollte zunehmend in den Vordergrund gerückt werden, und Schlupflöcher für Mitgliedstaaten, wie auch schon angesprochen wurde, sollten in jedem Fall wieder geschlossen werden. Denn Leistungen, die in der Arbeitsmarkt- und Sozialpolitik von Mitgliedstaaten getragen werden müssen, dürfen keinesfalls auf den EGF abgewälzt werden.

Im Übrigen bin ich der Meinung, dass bei künftigen Ernennungen zum Europäischen Rechnungshof so lange nur Frauen zum Zug kommen sollten, bis eine vernünftige gender balance erreicht ist.

  Tim Aker, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Thank you, Mr. President. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – well, there is a euphemism if ever I heard one. It seems that the solution to all of the problems in the European Union is more money, more money, more money – not a change of policy, not a change of direction. God forbid you guys actually ditch the single currency which is causing misery to southern Europe and creeping its way upwards. But you do not understand, you are getting this money from taxpayers who are already suffering. You may see increased GDP numbers but, in my country, productivity may be up but people’s wages have been compressed because of the seemlessly unlimited supply of cheap labour coming from complete free movement and open borders.

There is another way that you can change this: you can take back control. There is a democratic revolution taking place, with referendums becoming the issue of the day across every single EU Member State, and they will happen. So go with the tide, take back control over trade policy so that you can determine trade policies that reflect your constituents in your country first and foremost, because we are sent here as public servants. We are not here to do what the European Union wants, we are here to do what our constituents want. 17.4 million people in the United Kingdom – a majority – voted to take back control of trade policy so that we can create trade policies that limit redundancies, to make sure that we do not have to discuss redundancy packages. You can do the same. Follow our lead, take back control, let democracy and let your people win the day.

  Auke Zijlstra, namens de ENF-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de verordening is helder over het doel van het globaliseringsfonds. Het fonds is namelijk bedoeld om mensen die hun baan verloren hebben door de wereldwijde economische en financiële crisis, weer aan het werk te krijgen. Maar de evaluatie leert ons twee dingen: ten eerste vindt minder dan de helft van de mensen die een uitkering krijgen uit het fonds weer een baan. Dat kun je onmogelijk een succes noemen. Ten tweede is er helemaal geen wereldwijde crisis meer, zodat ook niet aan de voorwaarden voldaan wordt. Alleen in de Europese Unie blijft de economische groei laag en in de eurolanden is het zelfs nog beroerder dan in de overige lidstaten. Mijn vraag is dan ook heel eenvoudig: Het fonds voldoet niet aan zijn eigen criteria en heeft geen succes, waarom blijven we hier dan geld in stoppen? De enige die blij is met dit fonds, is de Europese Unie zelf. Nu de EU langzamerhand de macht heeft gekregen over het economische, het financiële en ook het sociale beleid, is dat een heel slecht teken.

  Arne Gericke, im Namen der ECR-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wir haben gestern die Rede zur Lage der Union gehört, und wir haben viel darüber gejammert, dass Europa bei den Menschen nicht ankommt. Heute diskutieren wir die Form und Wirkung des Europäischen Globalisierungsfonds – ein Musterbeispiel dafür, was wir von europäischer Seite gut meinen, oft aber schlecht machen. Der Fonds ist ein Instrument, das direkt ankommt. Er ist gedacht für Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer sowie Selbständige, die ihre Arbeit verloren haben, um ihnen ganz konkret bei der Reintegration in den Arbeitsmarkt zu helfen. Er ist gedacht für Städte, für Regionen, die von der Schließung eines großen Unternehmens betroffen sind und, sagen wir, unter ökonomischem Schock stehen – so weit so gut.

Nur, ich zitiere das Nachrichtenmagazin „Der Spiegel“: „Wir reden auch von Millionen, die keiner haben will.“ Meine Fraktion hat deshalb gemeinsam mit mir die Debatten über den Fonds konstruktiv kritisch begleitet, und wir sagen: Dieser Fonds muss besser werden, wenn er einen Sinn erfüllen soll. Direkte Hilfe macht nur dann Sinn, wenn sie schnell, wirklich direkt und unbürokratisch erfolgt. Das, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, bleibt die große Herausforderung in der zweiten Hälfte des laufenden Fonds.

  Σωτήριος Ζαριανόπουλος ( NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η δήθεν στήριξη των μαζικά απολυμένων, που θα εμπλουτιστεί από την επικείμενη απελευθέρωση των μαζικών απολύσεων από την ελληνική κυβέρνηση και το κουαρτέτο, επιβεβαιώνουν διαπιστώσεις της έκθεσης ότι, πρώτον, οι επιχειρήσεις κλείνουν είτε από ανταγωνισμό μεγαλύτερων, είτε λόγω μετακίνησής τους σε άλλο τόπο ή κλάδο για μεγαλύτερα κέρδη με μικρότερο εργατικό κόστος, αξιοποιώντας την περίφημη ελευθερία διακίνησης κεφαλαίων από τη Συνθήκη του Μάαστριχτ. Δηλαδή, με άλλα λόγια, καπιταλισμός.

Δεύτερον, ο φόβος των αντιδράσεων στις απολύσεις εμποδίζει τέτοιες αναδιαρθρώσεις. Σαν μέρος αυτών λοιπόν το Ταμείο Παγκοσμιοποίησης αναλαμβάνει να τις εκτονώσει μοιράζοντας «ασπιρίνες». Για αυτό, οι αιτούντες τη βοήθειά του είναι κυρίως εργοδότες. Τα προγράμματα κατάρτισης, δηλαδή επιδότηση της εργοδοσίας με το επίδομα ανεργίας των ανέργων, αν καταλήγουν σε θέση εργασίας αυτή είναι πολύ χειρότερη από την προηγούμενη: οι επιδοτούμενες μικροεπιχειρήσεις κλείνουν, ενώ επιτήδειοι λυμαίνονται κονδύλια του Ταμείου. Οι «ασπιρίνες» δεν γιατρεύουν τον καρκίνο της ανεργίας. Αγώνας, τώρα, να μην περάσει η απελευθέρωση των απολύσεων. Αυξημένο επίδομα ανεργίας σε όλους, για όλη τη διάρκειά της, με πλήρη ασφαλιστική κάλυψη.

  David Casa (PPE). – U nixtieq nirringrazzja jien ukoll lil Marian Harkin għal dan ir-rapport li jittratta fond importanti. Id-diskussjoni illi kellna lbieraħ, pereżempju, fuq is-sitwazzjoni diffiċli illi qiegħda tiffaċċja l-kumpanija Caterpillar fil-Belġju hi eżempju tajjeb ta' fejn l-EGF jista' jkun effettiv. Naturalment hemm fejn wieħed jimpruvja. Naturalment il-problema li għandna...

(Il-President interrompa lill-kelliem minħabba nuqqas ta' interpretazzjoni)

Naturalment... kont qed nitkellem dwar id-diskussjoni li kellna lbieraħ fuq il-kumpanija Caterpillar fil-Belġju li hi eżempju tajjeb ta' fejn l-EGF jista' jiġi użat. Naturalment irridu nkunu effettivi iktar, irridu nkunu rapidi iktar għaliex mhux sew illi ħaddiema jitħallew jistennew biex forsi jistgħu jerġgħu jidħlu fid-dinja tax-xogħol permezz ta' dan il-fond u jkollhom jistennew żmien twil.

Però, naturalment, saru avvanzi f'dan il-Fond. Illum qegħdin anzi aħna nħeġġu lill-pajjiżi membri biex jużaw kemm jista' jkun dan il-Fond illi jista' jgħin ħafna f'dik is-sitwazzjoni diffiċli li jkun għaddej minnha l-ħaddiem.

  Marita Ulvskog (S&D). – Herr talman! Det är viktigt att vi utvärderar hur globaliseringsfonden kan komma fler företag till nytta – både små och stora.

En av de frågor som vi tyvärr inte har kunnat enas om är kravet på antal anställda som måste drabbas för att fonden ska kunna användas. Jag har ett konkret exempel, nämligen en livsmedelsindustri i södra Sverige, Findus i Bjuv i Skåne. Med dagens regler är det osäkert om vi skulle kunna mobilisera fonden för att hjälpa de anställda hos Findus. Jag menar att vi måste göra någonting åt det. Även i fall som detta där så många drabbas, där en hel bransch utsätts för påfrestningar, borde fonden kunna spela en större roll än den gör i dag.

Vi måste också titta på hur EGF kan användas för att mildra omständigheterna för företag som drabbas på grund av handelskonflikter. Kommissionen har tidigare sagt att fonden inte kan mobiliseras för detta. Parlamentets tolkning är att den kan det. Vad säger kommissionen i dag? Vi måste kunna enas om fondens tillämpning. Det är klart att vi även har lyssnat till handelskommissionären, Cecilia Malmström, som har öppnat för en sådan tolkning.

Det pratas om nedskärningar i fonden samtidigt som Malmström alltså hävdar att alla negativa konsekvenser som kommer som resultat av handelsavtal ska kunna åtgärdas av fonden. Jag ser fram emot ett svar på den frågan.

  Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisa komissaari, globalisaatiorahasto on toiminut silloin hyvin, jos ihmiset ovat sen kautta uudelleenkouluttautuneet tai saaneet uuden työpaikan. Näistä hyvistä kokemuksista on otettava oppia. Mutta on myönnettävä, että globalisaatiorahaston toiminnassa on paljon puutteita, ja nämä on korjattava.

On tapauksia, joissa rahaston varoja on käytetty kompensoimaan kansallisia sosiaalietuuksia. Tähän tarkoitukseen rahastoa ei ole luotu. Se on luotu auttamaan ihmisiä. Myös päällekkäisyyksiä muiden EU-rahastojen antamien tukien kautta on pystyttävä karsimaan. Yksi puute on vielä se, että uudelleentyöllistymisaste on joissakin tapauksissa, jolloin tukea on annettu, jäänyt aivan liian alhaiseksi, jopa neljään prosenttiin.

Lopuksi haluan kiittää esittelijää. Hän on hyvin arvokkaasti tuonut uudistusehdotuksia ja kertonut globalisaatiorahaston toiminnasta.

Procedura catch-the-eye

  Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sprawozdanie pani posłanki Harkin w bardzo dobry sposób podsumowuje dotychczasowe osiągnięcia Europejskiego Funduszu Dostosowania do Globalizacji (EFG). Słusznie w sprawozdaniu znalazło się miejsce na ważną kwestię potrzeby rozróżnienia pomiędzy tym funduszem a Europejskim Funduszem Społecznym (EFS). Oczywiście są to instrumenty komplementarne i często skierowane do tej samej grupy docelowej. Należy jednak pamiętać, iż podczas gdy EFS ma wieloletni cykl programowania, EGF jest instrumentem, który może reagować szybciej. Z tego względu należy zabiegać o jak największą synergię tych instrumentów. EFS można traktować jako środek uzupełniający i kontynuujący wsparcie na obszarach interwencji EGF.

Ważne jest, aby inwestować w długoterminowe rozwiązania poprawiające sytuację na rynku pracy oraz poziom kwalifikacji pracowników. Niestety odsetek samozatrudnionych wśród osób otrzymujących wsparcie w ramach EGF jest niski, jest to kwestia nad którą należy pracować.

  Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, am vrut să iau cuvântul în calitate de raportor special al Grupului socialist în cadrul Comisiei pentru bugete pentru astfel de proiecte legate de Fondul european pentru ajustare la globalizare. Am fost deseori raportor și, de aceea, îmi permit să vin cu următoarele sugestii. Fondul trebuie să devină mai accesibil prin reducerea pragului de angajați disponibilizați. Astfel, și foști angajați ai IMM-urilor pot beneficia de acest fond. De asemenea, Comisia trebuie să vegheze la o folosire corectă și uniformă la nivel european. Unele state folosesc fonduri în exces, în timp ce altele îl folosesc prea puțin. De aceea, cred că Comisia trebuie să preia comunicarea pe acest subiect de la statele membre și să se asigure că acestea sunt folosite eficient. Fondul european de ajustare la globalizare este un mecanism util, așa cum au spus și antevorbitorii, pentru combaterea șomajului. Dar trebuie, într-adevăr, să găsim o manieră prin care acesta să fie finanțat adecvat. Fondul acesta este un răspuns rapid la situațiile nefericite generate de globalizare. Dar ne trebuie și un răspuns pe termen lung și, de aceea, este important ca acesta să fie sprijinit și din alte fonduri europene.

  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Προσαρμογής στην Παγκοσμιοποίηση συστάθηκε με σκοπό την παροχή στήριξης προς τους εργαζόμενους που απολύθηκαν λόγω μεγάλων διαρθρωτικών αλλαγών ή εξαιτίας της παγκόσμιας χρηματοοικονομικής κρίσης. Για την περίοδο 2007-2013, ο ετήσιος προϋπολογισμός του Ταμείου ήταν 550 εκατομμύρια ευρώ. Όμως, για τη φετινή χρονιά, το ποσό αυτό θα πέσει στα 150 εκατομμύρια ευρώ. Συγκεκριμένα, το Ταμείο Παγκοσμιοποίησης έδωσε πρόσφατα το πράσινο φως για τη χορήγηση βοήθειας ύψους 6,5 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ στους 557 απολυμένους του σούπερ μάρκετ «Λάρισα» στην Ελλάδα, έπειτα από αίτηση που είχε υποβληθεί από τις ελληνικές αρχές στις 26 Νοεμβρίου του 2015.

Επομένως, δεδομένου του ρόλου του Ταμείου Παγκοσμιοποίησης, και όπως ζήτησα ήδη με γραπτή μου ερώτηση στις 26 Απριλίου προς την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή θα πρέπει, αντίστοιχα με την αποζημίωση των απολυμένων του σούπερ μάρκετ «Λάρισα», να δρομολογηθεί άμεσα και η αποζημίωση των απολυμένων από την «Ηλεκτρονική Αθηνών» στην Ελλάδα, η οποία κήρυξε πτώχευση, αφήνοντας άνεργους πάνω από 500 εργαζόμενους.

  Romana Tomc (PPE). – Jaz že zelo dolgo časa spremljam delovanje tega sklada in seveda spremljam tudi, kako se je v tem času spreminjal. Od začetnih, bolj okorelih pravil, ki so omogočala dodelitev sredstev samo tistim največjim podjetjem oziroma zaposlenim, ki so bili odpuščeni v največjih podjetjih, je sedaj možno pridobiti sredstva iz sklada tudi celo za samozaposlene.

Ampak seveda nismo še naredili dovolj. Treba je še več prilagajanja, kajti strinjam se s kolegom, ki je prej opozoril, da mala in srednja podjetja, o katerih zelo veliko govorimo v tem parlamentu, še vedno nimajo enake možnosti dostopa do teh sredstev.

Podjetja in seveda predvsem države so s pridom izkoriščale ta sklad. Žal mi je, da je iz moje države, iz Slovenije, zaenkrat prišla in bila ugodno rešena samo ena vloga.

Slišim za zelo veliko težav, zato pozivam Komisijo, da naredi vse te postopke malo manj zbirokratizirane, da bodo ljudje lažje prišli do sredstev.

(Fine della procedura catch-the-eye)

  Marianne Thyssen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, once again I would like to express my appreciation for the work done by the rapporteur and I would also like to thank Parliament on behalf of the Commission for the valuable suggestions to further improve the functioning of the European Globalisation Fund and to adapt it as well as the legal basis allows to the constantly changing needs of the European labour market.

Today, the European Globalisation Fund cannot be used to anticipate the consequences of global trade; it has been designed to react to concrete situations such as the closure of factories. My personal view is that anticipating is always better than repairing the damage. It is therefore logical that trade policy be well coordinated with social and industrial policy to prepare our economy in good time for the changes triggered by a new trade partnership. Today, as you know, the preparation of trade agreements includes a social impact assessment. A trade agreement must, of course, generate overall a positive outcome for both partners, but within the globally positive deal it is not excluded that certain sectors of our economies could suffer. In that respect, I share the view of Cecilia Malmström that something should be done to address possible negative effects of global trade on specific sectors and, as I said, the EGF in its current design is not fit for that purpose.

I want to reassure Members of Parliament that, as your President said, I will ensure that for all policies appropriate gender indicators are used to monitor the respect of gender equality in particular in the labour market and we will of course further reflect on the ideas in your report when preparing the legal basis for the functioning of the EGF beyond 2020. I thank you for your inspiration.

  Marian Harkin, rapporteur. – Mr President, I thank colleagues for a most engaging debate. I will not be able to respond to all of the issues raised, but I will try to address a number of them at least.

Commissioner, you started by agreeing that the EGF cannot be used as an intervention tool in job losses in the case of trade deals, and that was re-echoed by many colleagues, particularly Maria Reina who quite rightly challenged Commissioner Malmström for suggesting at some point previously that a small EUR 150 million per annum fund could deal with the negative fall-out from proposed trade deals. Many colleagues spoke of the need to anticipate and manage change, and I think we need to broaden our thinking to see if earlier action or pre-emptive action could be more effective. Some colleagues suggested that employers are using the EGF as a means of evading their legislative responsibilities. I reject this assertion as in all cases Member States guarantee that the dismissing enterprises have complied with all their legal obligations. We might wish that those legal obligations were more extensive, but that is a separate issue. The core point is that the EGF does not replace the responsibilities of companies; it is a solidarity mechanism from the EU and employers do not benefit.

I was really pleased to hear the Commissioner say that the Commission going to come forward with a proposal to extend the derogation on NEETs. Because this a new facet to the EGF, we have not had time yet to assess its impact, but we need to ensure that measures targeting NEETs are tailored towards their needs, and in that context I thank my colleague, Lynn Boylan, whose amendment on ensuring community participation will, I believe, improve the participation of NEETs.

Commissioner Thyssen, you spoke of the derogations with regard to 4.1(a) and (b), but we also have 4.2 where, in exceptional circumstances, there can be applications from small labour markets. I just want to ask you if there is any bias against those applications – I would hope not. And I agree with colleagues who say that workers in SMEs have not had the same access as workers in larger companies. Finally, I believe that if the suggestions in this report, which represent a compromise from all across Parliament, are implemented, the EGF will be improved and will serve our workers in a more timely, targeted and efficient way.

President. – The debate is closed.

  Daniel Buda (PPE), în scris. – Obiectivul principal al Fondului european de ajustare la globalizare (FEG) este de a acționa rapid și eficient pentru a contracara dificultățile neprevăzute pe piața forței de muncă.

Instrumentul a contribuit la atenuarea efectelor negative ale restructurărilor, venind în sprijinul sectoarelor afectate cel mai mult de criză. Măsurile FEG au caracter provizoriu, însă, pe termen lung, ar trebui să urmărească noi perspective profesionale, în funcție de potențialul de ocupare existent în regiunile afectate de relocarea sau restrângerea activității anumitor industrii. Există regiuni care înregistrează o rată negativă a șomajului; astfel, consider că măsurile FEG ar trebui să cuprindă și opțiuni precum sprijin pentru relocarea lucrătorilor afectați de șomaj în zonele cu potențial ridicat de ocupare.

Anul trecut, restructurarea activității unei companii din sectorul siderurgic, Mechel Turda, în regiunea pe care o reprezint, a însemnat disponibilizarea a 1 000 de lucrători, care au beneficiat de sprijinul FEG în valoare de 3,6 milioane de euro, însă procedurile birocratice au dus la întârzieri și, ulterior, la impunerea unor penalități Guvernului României.

Ar trebui să acordăm o atenție deosebită monitorizării impactului globalizării, oferind sprijin întreprinderilor pentru a anticipa schimbările sectoriale și pentru a câștiga timp în vederea reprofesionalizării lucrătorilor aflați sub amenințarea disponibilizărilor.