Пълен протокол на разискванията

Вторник, 10 декември 2013 г. - Страсбург

20. Европейски фонд за приспособяване към глобализацията (2014—2020 г.) (разискване)

  Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest sprawozdanie sporządzone przez Marian Harkin w imieniu Komisji Zatrudnienia i Spraw Socjalnych w sprawie wniosku dotyczącego rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie Europejskiego Funduszu Dostosowania do Globalizacji (2014–2020) (COM(2011)0608 - C7-0319/2011 - 2011/0269(COD)) (A7-0005/2013)

  Marian Harkin, rapporteur. − Mr President, I shall start off by thanking a number of people. First of all, I want to thank all my colleagues on the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the shadows and our Chair, for their support and, indeed, for their ongoing commitment to this fund, and also from the opinion-giving committees.

I secondly want to thank Parliament itself for its numerous resolutions on maintaining the crisis derogation, and I am pleased to see that the crisis derogation is in the current instrument because a very significant number of applications came in under the crisis derogation. I also want to thank our Commissioner, Commissioner Andor, and the Commission for their ongoing support, along with that of the President of the Commission, Mr Barroso, and Mr Van Rompuy. I want to thank the Lithuanian Presidency. They are not here at the moment, but they certainly showed a willingness to do business and to get a fund in place that was fit for purpose. I also want to thank the Irish Presidency for their efforts to unblock the blocking minority in Council, and they were ultimately successful.

After all of those ‘thank yous’ we have a document here in place this evening and the question is: is it fit for purpose? The Commission in its report tells us that the reintegration rate of European Globalisation Fund participants is 48%. It certainly varies between Member States, but that is a good outcome. We also know that the personalised, tailor-made packages that target workers are effective, in that they reach the harder to reach workers; those, for example, who are older or those who have lower educational attainment.

There were a number of criticisms of the current globalisation fund and I believe we have managed to deal with many of those issues. First of all, we have worked with the Commission to improve the timeliness of the fund and we have a defined timeframe for submission and evaluation of projects now in place. We have broadened the category of workers who can apply to the fund. It now includes self-employed, temporary agency and fixed-term workers.

We had wanted a differentiated co-financing rate, but we had to agree in the end to a single co-financing rate of 60% , but that is still 10% more than the original co-financing rate of 50%, because an issue for some Member States was that the cofinancing rate was too low, so we have moved in the right direction.

Crucially we have capped the special time-limited allowance at 35%. These allowances included mobility allowance, systems and training allowance etc and some Member States were spending up to 70-75% of their application on these measures. We did not believe this was a good use of European money and it certainly did not give European added value, so I am very pleased now that we have capped those allowances and that the majority of the money will go into training, up-skilling, entrepreneurship, etc. This was a red line for Parliament and signalled by the Court of Auditors.

We have also strengthened the partnership principle by ensuring that the package of personalised services is drawn up in consultation either with the redundant workers themselves or their representatives or the social partners, because we know that the objectives of the fund are much more likely to be achieved when this happens.

We have also significantly broadened the eligible beneficiaries to include an equal number of NEETs – that is, those not in education, employment or training – to that of redundant workers for whom the application is made in the first place, provided that the application is in a region which is eligible for the youth employment initiative. EGF support will therefore assist young unemployed as well as redundant workers.

The fund was originally EUR 3 billion. It is now just over a billion. It is a significant decrease and we have a possible doubling of the number of applicants. I sincerely hope the amount we have will be sufficient. We have a number of other improvements which I will outline in my final two minutes because I believe I am over time. My final question is: is it fit for purpose? All I can say is I hope that for those workers who will access this fund that it is.

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I wish to thank the rapporteur, Marian Harkin, for the constructive approach to this proposal. Following fruitful negotiations between the three institutions, I believe that we have reached a common objective with the adoption of this proposal. Convincing some of the reluctant Member States has not been easy, and I wish to express the Commission’s deep appreciation for the constant support of the European Parliament throughout the negotiation process.

The legislative proposal is very timely, coming as it does while a majority of our Member States continue to experience the repercussions of the global financial and economic crisis. In addition, besides all the positive things that globalisation brings, we shall inevitably continue to also address the periodic adjustments it entails when it forces companies to close or relocate.

The new design of the EGF, I believe, will serve the purpose of providing relief and support to the affected workers. We now have a Fund which has a wider scope – it can be called upon in cases of both globalisation and the crisis. The fund has a larger group of potential beneficiaries, in that self-employed, temporary and part-time workers have been added to the redundant workers who can currently be taken care of. Even if not explicitly, farmers are also included among the potential beneficiaries in their capacity as self-employed. The agreed co-funding rate – although not our preferred option – now set at 60 %, is still more beneficial for all Member States than the current one.

Last but not least, under special conditions, young unemployed can also be supported to find their place in the labour market. This is a provision which adds to the other options that Member States will have in the very near future to combat youth unemployment in the most affected regions.

  Alda Sousa, relatora de parecer da Comissão dos Orçamentos − Senhor Presidente, apesar de este não ser o quadro legal que gostaríamos para o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização, importa sublinhar que o apoio que tem sido dado aos trabalhadores no contexto deste Fundo é um apoio dirigido àqueles e àquelas que são as primeiras vítimas dos dramáticos processos de deslocalização e de reestruturação industrial na Europa.

O esforço de adequar o treino e a formação dos trabalhadores despedidos de acordo com as suas necessidades específicas, o alargamento do Fundo a todos os que se encontram em condições precárias, nomeadamente precários de call centers, por exemplo, são notas claramente positivas.

Este Fundo não resolve o problema todo e será, portanto, sempre insuficiente porque não há um quadro legal europeu nem nenhum apelo aos Estados-Membros para que resolvam quadros legais que restrinjam e evitem as deslocalizações e as falsas restruturações e obriguem as multinacionais a suportar os custos destes despedimentos coletivos.

Os mais de 113 pedidos de mobilização do FEAG submetido por 20 Estados-Membros, que beneficia diretamente 102 411 trabalhadores, são suficientes para mostrar a enorme importância deste fundo mas também a hipocrisia que é o corte previsto para o quadro financeiro plurianual de cerca de um terço deste Fundo, num cenário que é de aprofundamento da austeridade.

  Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Εισηγητής της γνωμοδότησης της Επιτροπής Ελέγχου των Προϋπολογισμών. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, είμαι ιδιαίτερα ικανοποιημένος από τον περιορισμό της περιττής γραφειοκρατίας καθώς και από το γεγονός ότι η αρμόδια για τον προϋπολογισμό αρχή πρέπει να αποφασίσει εντός προθεσμίας ενός μηνός εάν θα κινητοποιήσει ή όχι τη διαδικασία των ενισχύσεων. Επιπλέον, είναι θετικό το γεγονός ότι οι εργαζόμενοι των μικρών και μεσαίων επιχειρήσεων συμπεριλαμβάνονται σε όσους δικαιούνται να υποβάλουν αίτηση στο εν λόγω ταμείο. Το ίδιο ισχύει και όσον αφορά την αντιμετώπιση της ανεργίας των νέων. Επικροτώ την εξαίρεση που υιοθετήθηκε, ώστε να συμπεριληφθούν μέχρι τον Δεκέμβριο του 2017 και άτομα που δεν εργάζονται ή βρίσκονται εκτός εκπαίδευσης ή κατάρτισης. Το ταμείο δεν είναι σε θέση να δώσει αποτελεσματικές λύσεις στο ευρύτερο πρόβλημα ανεργίας που αντιμετωπίζει σήμερα η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Για να περιοριστεί αποτελεσματικά το ποσοστό ανεργίας στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, χρειάζεται να αφοσιωθούμε σε απτές λύσεις με μακροπρόθεσμα αποτελέσματα και γερά θεμέλια.

  Jens Geier, Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für regionale Entwicklung. − Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar Andor, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als Autor der Stellungnahme des Ausschusses für regionale Entwicklung für diesen Bericht will ich darauf hinweisen, dass Regionalpolitik bzw. Arbeitslosigkeit immer eine regionale Komponente hat.

In meinem Heimatland Deutschland haben wir Regionen mit bis zu 20 % Arbeitslosigkeit und andere Regionen nahezu mit Vollbeschäftigung. Das zeigt, dass die Bekämpfung von Arbeitslosigkeit eine regionale Komponente hat.

Der Fonds zur Bekämpfung der Folgen der Globalisierung versetzt die betroffenen Regionen in die Lage, etwas gegen plötzlich steigende Arbeitslosigkeit zu tun. Deswegen hat der Ausschuss den Bericht eindeutig begrüßt.

Die Schwäche dieses Fonds besteht darin, dass seine Reaktionszeit eindeutig zu lang ist, und deswegen hat sich der Ausschuss für regionale Entwicklung daran beteiligt, Vorschläge für die Vereinfachung und die Beschleunigung der Verfahren zu machen, und er hat sich – zu meiner großen Zufriedenheit – erfolgreich dafür eingesetzt, den Geltungsbereich dieses Fonds nicht auf Landwirte auszudehnen.

  Luís Paulo Alves, relator de parecer da Comissão da Agricultura e do Desenvolvimento Rural − Senhor Presidente, defendi na Comissão de Agricultura que, ao não lhe ter sido concedida a competência legislativa necessária para assegurar o FEAG como um instrumento verdadeiramente capaz de produzir com eficácia as respostas necessárias para os agricultores, a COMAGRI deveria decidir pela sua exclusão do fundo. Devia fazê-lo reclamando a parte do envelope financeiro que estava reservado aos agricultores para utilização no âmbito da PAC. De resto, as necessidades dos agricultores e as suas especificidades nesta matéria encontravam-se no seio da PAC, o lugar mais adequado para o seu tratamento.

O pior serviço que se podia prestar aos agricultores era aprovarmos o regulamento onde se pudesse invocar a sua presença, mas que os agricultores não pudessem utilizar ou encontrar as respostas de que realmente precisavam. E, de facto, assim é, chegados aqui, nem o regulamento possui o mínimo de adequabilidade para dar resposta aos agricultores, nem o envelope financeiro assegura os meios necessários para que tal resposta seja minimamente eficaz ou lhe possa ser dada. Já o regulamento, para benefício dos trabalhadores, encontra-se bastante melhorado e dou por isso os meus parabéns a todos quanto contribuíram para que tal sucedesse.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Moterų teisių ir lyčių lygybės komiteto nuomonės referentė. − Dėkoju pranešėjai už gerai atliktą darbą. Labai svarbu, kad mes galėtume patvirtinti Globalizacijos fondo veikimą ateinantiems septyneriems metams, nes bendri bedarbystės rodikliai Europoje dar šiandien yra gan dideli, jaunimo nedarbas taip pat nemažėja, o naujų darbo vietų kūrimas dar nėra atstatytas į prieškrizinį lygį, tuo tarpu konkurencija iš tikrųjų pasaulio rinkose labai intensyvi.

Taigi mes turime arba įgalinti savo įmones konkuruoti pasaulio rinkose, arba turėti instrumentų, kurie leistų padėti tų įmonių, kurios neatlaikė globalizacijos spaudimo ir kuriose vyko masiniai darbuotojų atleidimai, darbuotojams. Ir tik dėl šių priežasčių Globalizacijos fondas turi išlikti ir turi toliau veikti.

Taip pat šiuo fondu ir toliau galėsime padėti darbuotojams, kurie nukentėjo per masinius atleidimus dėl ekonominės krizės, o taip pat padėti ir tiems jaunuoliams, kurie nei mokosi, nei dirba, patekti į darbo rinką. Labai džiaugiuosi, kad Fondo lėšos galės būti naudojamos ir siekiant padėti sugrįžti į darbo rinką darbuotojams, kurie dirba laikinai, kurie dirba pagal terminuotas darbo sutartis – tai dažnai būna moterys, todėl labai svarbu, kad šio Fondo lėšos galėtų būti naudojamos ir tam.

  Edit Bauer, a PPE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Az Európai Globalizációs Alkalmazkodási Alap elsősorban nyilvánvalóan a tömeges elbocsátások esetén nyújthat hathatós támogatást. Ha őszinték akarunk lenni önmagunkhoz, el kell mondani, hogy voltak olyan esetünk, amikor az átképzéseket az új, harmadik országból érkező befektető javára finanszíroztuk, de olyan is, amikor a támogatás 70%-a gyakorlatilag munkanélküli segélyként került kifizetésre – nyilvánvalóan a tagállam helyett, így az európai hozzáadott érték sokszor nem igazán jelent meg.

Az is ismert tény, hogy a tagállamok egy része soha nem kért támogatást ebből az alapból annak ellenére, hogy a feltételnek megfelelt, jogosult lett volna, mert a hozzáférés túl bonyolult, túl bürokratikus. Tanulva a tapasztalatokból, reméljük, a rendelet hatékonyabbá teszi az alap merítését. Örvendetes, hogy a segélyszerű kifizetések nem léphetik túl a személyre szabott szolgáltatási csomag teljes költségének 35%-át.

Sajnos viszont nem sikerült jobb kompromisszumot elérni a társfinanszírozás arányát illetően. A Tanács ragaszkodott az egységes 60%-hoz, a Parlament javaslata fokozottan vette volna figyelembe a régió konkrét helyzetét, és ehhez igazította volna a társfinanszírozás mértékét. Új elem a rendeletben a fiatalok munkanélküliségének kezelése az alap forrásainak segítségével. Remélhetőleg hatékony eszközzel bővül a fiatalok munkanélkülisége elleni küzdelem fegyvertára.

Végezetül szeretném megköszönni Marian Harkinnak a nagyon kitűnő és effektív együttműködést.

  Frédéric Daerden, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, ayant travaillé sur le nouveau cadre budgétaire et dans la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales, j'avais de grandes craintes concernant l'avenir de ce Fonds d'ajustement à la mondialisation. Demain, il sera prolongé et nous revenons de loin.

Grâce à la négociation menée avec fermeté par notre rapporteure – que je félicite pour son travail –, par notre présidente de commission, par les rapporteurs fictifs, mais aussi par quelques alliés parmi les négociateurs au Conseil, ainsi qu'avec l'aide de la Commission, on a pu assurer la pérennité du Fonds, un des rares soutiens de l'Europe aux travailleurs.

Au-delà de la pérennisation du Fonds, on a pu le renforcer pour qu'il soit plus efficace, avec la réintroduction du critère "crise", qui permet de rencontrer la réalité de nos restructurations; avec tous les types de contrats qui sont dorénavant couverts, ce qui permet d'aider davantage de travailleurs; avec le taux de cofinancement, qui a été porté à 60 %; avec les jeunes des régions sinistrées qui pourront être aidés par ce Fonds; avec les travailleurs qui pourront reprendre leur activité, leur entreprise, aidés par le Fonds.

Mais nous ne sommes pas contents sur tout. Premièrement, les moyens financiers consacrés au FEM devraient être renforcés de manière significative, afin de pouvoir répondre aux besoins. Deuxièmement, le Fonds devrait, demain, pouvoir jouer un rôle réel dans le processus de restructuration, afin de devenir un outil anticipatif de dépistage des restructurations et d'aide au processus de réaffectation des travailleurs et ainsi d'éviter ces licenciements.

Je suis convaincu qu'avec ce nouveau règlement, nous renforçons la solidarité entre les Européens.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΑΝΝΥ ΠΟΔΗΜΑΤΑ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Angelika Werthmann, im Namen der ALDE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Der EGF war ursprünglich ein Instrument, das es ermöglicht hatte, Arbeitskräfte, die aufgrund der Globalisierung ihre Arbeit verloren haben, zu unterstützen – tatkräftig zu unterstützen, wie ich meine. Es kam die Wirtschaftskrise, und man musste den Fonds auf jene Arbeitnehmer ausweiten, die unmittelbar und in der Folge der weltweiten Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise arbeitslos wurden. Für die Betroffenen war es auf jeden Fall eine notwendige Hilfe.

Der vorliegende Vorschlag ist auf jeden Fall außerhalb des EU-Budgets geführt und im Prinzip meiner Meinung nach illusorisch. Denn für einen tatsächlichen Mehrwert müsste er weit über das hinausreichen, was schon in den nationalen Gesetzen geregelt ist.

Festhalten muss ich, dass der EGF nun ein deutlich geringeres Budget haben wird, nämlich 150 Millionen Euro pro Jahr, was ein Gesamtvolumen von einer Milliarde für die Zahlungsperiode von 2014 bis 2020 ausmacht.

  Marije Cornelissen, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – De afgelopen jaren als woordvoerder van mijn fractie voor het globaliseringsfonds vond ik heel leerzaam. De aanvragen waren een graadmeter om na te gaan welke sectoren in de problemen kwamen in de crisis, welke landen en regio's het hardst werden getroffen. Uit de aanvragen bleek helaas ook dat er veel te weinig vooruitgekeken wordt. De ondergang van de Vlaamse textielindustrie had bijvoorbeeld al lang kunnen worden voorspeld. En dan had men preventief plannen kunnen maken om die industrie te herstructureren en de werknemers op tijd om te scholen.

Aan de positieve kant heeft het Europees globaliseringsfonds in heel veel landen heel veel goeds gebracht voor mensen die dat heel hard nodig hebben. Er zijn mobiliteitscentra opgericht in landen en regio's waar er geen waren. Er zijn verbazend veel mensen weer aan de slag gegaan, inclusief 50-plussers. Ik denk dat we best een goed resultaat hebben behaald in de onderhandelingen. Het globaliseringsfonds kan weliswaar nooit een goed en toekomstgericht arbeidsmarktbeleid vervangen, maar het geeft mensen die hun baan verliezen in deze tijden van crisis, hoop en uitzicht op nieuw werk en dat is juist nu van onschatbare waarde!

  Derek Roland Clark, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Madam President, 9 000 people in Ireland – at Dell, Waterford Crystal and elsewhere – will be grateful for the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, helping with guidance, training and education, when their firms close. Some blame cheap Chinese goods, produced through low wages, but two years ago in this House a Commission statement denied that this was true. The Commissioner said that it was China having its own central bank, setting its own interest rates and relating to world conditions so that exchange rates are helpful, resulting in goods at prices other people can afford.

Instead, we have draconian measures in place to prevent individual companies establishing their own exchange rates and competing globally, promoting prosperity. At the same time, report after report comes out of this House, all imposing more regulation. The result? Higher costs, reduced sales, firms closing and moving abroad, leading to rising unemployment. And all you do is wheel out the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, trying to conceal the fact that company after company is closing under the weight of EU inflicted regulation, when you cannot even keep well-established companies going. And you call that world leadership?

  Patricia van der Kammen (NI). - Voorzitter, het globaliseringsfonds faciliteert werkloosheid en bevoordeelt grote bedrijven ten opzichte van kleine bedrijven en zelfstandigen. Ondernemen omvat zowel kansen als risico's en kent zowel voorspoed als tegenslag. Het bestaan van een rijkelijk gevuld globaliseringsfonds verstoort die balans. Economische tegenslag of bijvoorbeeld de keuze voor bedrijfsverplaatsing worden dan immers door de maatschappij opgevangen in plaats van door de bedrijven. Het globaliseringsfonds werkt dus concurrentieverstorend en legt de bedrijfskosten van met name de grote bedrijven op het bord van de belastingbetaler.

Daarnaast geldt dat sociaal beleid en arbeidsmarktbeleid een zaak van de lidstaten is waar Brussel en Brusselse bureaucraten verre van moeten blijven. De PVV ziet meer dan genoeg redenen om het globaliseringsfonds vandaag nog af te schaffen.

  Thomas Mann (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Der EGF hat auch in diesem Jahr mit 150 Mio. EUR den Arbeitnehmern bei der Jobsuche geholfen, ebenso beim Erwerb von neuen Kompetenzen.

Das Signal ist eindeutig: Die EU lässt die Menschen nicht allein, wenn sie durch wirtschaftliche Schieflagen ihren Arbeitsplatz verloren haben. Der EGF ist ein Anreiz zur Integration in die Arbeitsmärkte. Er kann die sozialpolitischen Verpflichtungen der EU-Mitgliedstaaten zwar nicht ersetzen, aber wirksam ergänzen. Das muss Hand in Hand gehen mit nationalen Bildungsoffensiven.

In der EU sind mehr als zwei Millionen Stellen unbesetzt, da Arbeitssuchende oft nicht über die geforderten Qualifikationen verfügen. Abhilfe schaffen dabei sowohl die spezifischen EU-Förderprogramme als auch eine intensive Zusammenarbeit von Arbeitsverwaltungen, Berufsberatungen und Bildungseinrichtungen.

Mit der Europäischen Jugendgarantie haben wir einen Anfang gemacht. Private und öffentliche Arbeitgeber werden veranlasst, ausreichend Ausbildungs- und Arbeitsplätze zur Verfügung zu stellen, auch über den eigenen Bedarf hinaus.

Durch die Europäische Ko-Finanzierung kann vieles verwirklicht werden: Wiedereingliederungsmaßnahmen in den Arbeitsmarkt, Fortbildung, Umschulungen. So steigen die Chancen für ein zukunftsfähiges Erwerbsleben.

  Pervenche Berès (S&D). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, certains États membres avaient voulu condamner le fonds. Certains États membres avaient voulu penser que nous étions sortis de la crise et que nous n'en avions plus besoin.

Le Parlement européen a dit, depuis le début, que nous avions besoin de maintenir ce fonds, que nous avions besoin de maintenir le critère "crise", car la réalité est bien là: trop d'entreprises connaissent encore des situations de crise, dont les travailleurs sont les victimes.

Nous nous félicitons que la Commission et des États membres, y compris en vertu d'évolutions électorales, nous aient permis de sauver ce fonds, d'en faire, à l'heure qu'il est, le seul outil qui vient en soutien directement aux travailleurs victimes de la crise et de la mondialisation.

Nous nous réjouissons aussi de l'élargissement des critères, qui permet aux indépendants d'être couverts par le taux de financement à 60 %. Mme Bauer a rappelé que nous aurions voulu aller plus loin. Nous nous félicitons de ce que, dorénavant, les travailleurs pourront être accompagnés dans la reprise de leur outil productif. Nous nous félicitons de ce qu'à l'initiative du Parlement européen, l'extension aux jeunes du bénéfice de ce fonds ait été recentrée sur l'objet même de ce dernier, c'est-à-dire le soutien aux jeunes non qualifiés dans les régions victimes de ces restructurations.

Il appartient maintenant aux États membres de se saisir pleinement de ce fonds. Cela suppose, pour que cela soit fait avec efficacité, d'y associer pleinement les autorités publiques locales et les partenaires sociaux.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, bella cosa il nuovo regolamento sul FEG che permette ai lavoratori licenziati di integrarsi nel lavoro, ma non basta perché il perfezionamento del Fondo purtroppo non è sufficiente a fermare la demolizione del mercato del lavoro europeo.

La maggior parte dei lavoratori licenziati non troverà un nuovo impiego o si dovrà accontentare di soluzioni precarie non perché il Fondo non funzioni, ma perché non c'è lavoro. Se la Commissione vuole veramente ricostruire il mercato europeo allora deve subito mettere un freno all'eccessiva apertura dell'Europa verso i mercati di paesi in via di sviluppo. Finché l'Europa non cambierà la sua posizione nei confronti dei flussi commerciali globali le nostre aziende continueranno a fallire.

Il Fondo, diciamolo chiaramente, è un discreto sostegno temporaneo, ma non è grazie ai corsi di formazione che i nostri disoccupati ritroveranno la serenità e la sicurezza a cui ogni lavoratore ha diritto. Inoltre, c'è un grande problema che sta colpendo anche il mio Veneto: le multinazionali che, dopo aver sfruttato il territorio, chiudono lo stabilimento lasciando centinaia di dipendenti senza lavoro. La Commissione deve intervenire per governare ed evitare un dramma sociale che sta assumendo contorni sempre più preoccupanti.

  Emer Costello (S&D). - Madam President, I want to compliment the rapporteur on the work that she has done on this file. If we have learnt anything from the crisis it is that Europe must stand by its workers, particularly our older workers who have been made redundant. We need to help them find their way back into quality employment or set up their own businesses.

My own country, Ireland, has implemented seven EGF programmes since 2009, including one aimed at supporting 850 former SR Technics workers in Dublin and a national programme aimed at 6 000 construction workers. I know how valuable this fund is.

As the rapporteur Marian Harkin has said, significant improvements have been made in the fund. I very much welcome the fact that the EGF will once again be able to support job losses arising from the crisis, not just those caused by globalisation. I also welcome the increase in cofinancing from 50% to 60%; the extension to fixed-term, part-time and self-employed workers; and the reduction in red tape. But particularly important is the possibility that support can now be provided to young people not in employment, education or training, the so-called NEETs category.

Again I want to congratulate and thank the rapporteur for her hard work in bringing this to a successful conclusion.

(Διαδικασία "catch the eye")

  Regina Bastos (PPE). - Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, caros colegas, uma palavra para felicitar a Sra. relatora pelo bom trabalho.

O Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização tem sido um importante instrumento de solidariedade na Europa. Os despedimentos coletivos provocados pela globalização e pela crise económica ocorrem com muita frequência em regiões onde já há muitas pessoas desempregadas e onde as possibilidades de reconversão ou de encontrar outro emprego são muito difíceis.

Desde a sua criação há cinco anos, este fundo já ajudou mais de 100 mil trabalhadores de 20 Estados-Membros a encontrar um novo emprego e a adquirir novas competências. A continuação do FEAG é, por isso, muito importante, em especial para os países a braços com a crise. Por isso, saúdo a continuidade deste fundo até 2020, o que esteve em risco de não acontecer, saúdo o cofinanciamento de 60 % e saúdo também o facto de este fundo ser complementar às medidas de combate ao desemprego jovem, podendo beneficiar os jovens que estão em situação mais precária, que não conseguem arranjar trabalho ou não estão a estudar, e saúdo o alargamento do critério de abrangência deste fundo a outras categorias de trabalhadores.

  Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Europejski Fundusz Dostosowania do Globalizacji został stworzony po to, aby wesprzeć państwa i regiony przeżywające ogromne trudności wynikające z coraz bardziej globalizującej się gospodarki. Nieoczekiwanie jednak okazał się on użytecznym instrumentem w walce z negatywnymi skutkami światowego kryzysu finansowego i połączonego z nim kryzysu budżetowego w niektórych państwach członkowskich. Świadczy o tym fakt, że ponad 80% wniosków motywowanych było właśnie kryzysem. Wielu ekspertów wskazuje, że niezwykle trudno jest udowodnić, iż trudności, które przeżywa przedsiębiorstwo, wynikają właśnie z procesu globalizacji. Znacznie łatwiej jest udokumentować, że są one skutkiem kryzysu. Dobrze, że w następnym okresie finansowym przewidziano już na stałe taką możliwość.

Docenić należy także to, że fundusze będą mogły być wydatkowane solidarnie na wsparcie wszystkich pracowników, również tych, którzy pracują za pośrednictwem agencji pracy tymczasowej czy na zasadzie samozatrudnienia. Należy bowiem pamiętać, że coraz więcej Europejczyków pracuje w oparciu o elastyczne formy zatrudnienia i błędem byłoby nieobjęcie ich tym programem.

Na koniec chciałabym podkreślić, że wszyscy powinniśmy sobie życzyć, aby unijna gospodarka była w takim stanie, by środki z tego funduszu nie musiały być nigdy uruchamiane.

  Sari Essayah (PPE). - Arvoisa puhemies, globalisaatiorahastosta on tänäänkin täällä salissa jaettu apua työttömäksi jääneille ihmisille. Muun muassa kotimaani Suomen Nokian irtisanotut saivat tänään noin vajaat kymmenen miljoonaa euroa rahastosta. Tällaisissa isoissa alasajotilanteissa on myös erittäin tärkeää, että alihankintaketjussa olevat yrittäjät huomioidaan aivan niin kuin globalisaatiorahastossa jatkossa tullaan tekemään.

Jotkut näistä rahaston sääntöjen muutoksista ovat kuitenkin hivenen epäselviä. Henkilökohtaisesti en esimerkiksi pidä järkevänä sitä, että maatalousyrittäjät tuodaan globalisaatiorahaston piiriin. Mielestäni maatalousyrittäjät kuuluvat yhteisen maatalouspolitiikan piiriin, eivät tämän rahaston piiriin.

Olisin halunnut myös komission jäseneltä Andorilta kysyä, että mitä mieltä hän on siitä kritiikistä, mitä tilintarkastustuomioistuimen erityisraportissa viime kesänä tuotiin esille. Esimerkiksi siitä, että globalisaatiorahasto toimii hitaasti ja monet toimenpiteet oltaisiin tehty kansallisilla toimenpiteillä joka tapauksessa.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL). - Senhora Presidente, em primeiro lugar, uma questão de princípio em relação ao fundo. Não o absolutizemos como solução para os problemas de despedimentos na União Europeia. O que aqui estamos a discutir é apenas um paliativo. É necessário atacar o mal pela raiz, é necessária a rutura com políticas seguidas pela União Europeia que dia após dia estão a empobrecer os povos da Europa, a destruir milhões de postos de trabalho, a adiar o futuro de homens e mulheres, nomeadamente jovens, porque as políticas da União Europeia têm o objetivo de promoverem a concentração de capital, a acumulação de lucros, que apenas combina com uma mão-de-obra barata, destruindo sistemas produtivos, criando mais e mais despedimentos.

Segunda questão: em 2012, a maior parte deste fundo foi para a Espanha, Dinamarca, Itália, Suécia, Finlândia e Alemanha. Alguns destes países não são certamente os que têm a mais preocupante situação socioeconómica. Portugal e Grécia nem sequer requereram o fundo. Mesmo com um financiamento de 60 %, e saudamos a relatora por o ter conseguido, vários países correm o risco de estarem impedidos de usufruir o fundo. Por isso, propusemos uma alteração que prevê o financiamento de 95 % em caso de candidaturas apresentadas por um Estado-Membro cuja taxa de desemprego esteja acima da média da União Europeia. Pensamos que seria mais justo.

  Andrej Plenković (PPE). - Gospođo predsjedateljice, pozdravljam povjerenika Andora i unaprijed mu zahvaljujem na trudu u rješavanju problema hrvatskih špeditera. Zahvaljujem i našoj izvjestiteljici. Kao jedan od zastupnika koji je podnio izvješće u okviru provedbe Europskog fonda za prilagodbu globalizaciji, kada je riječ o regiji Valencia mogu kazati da je upravo aspekt brzine reagiranja na ovom primjeru postigao jedan važan korak naprijed.

Čini mi se da je dobro da ćemo idućih sedam godina ponovno imati ovaj Fond na raspolaganju s prilično značajnim sredstvima i da je proširen opseg osoba na koje će se on odnositi, posebno na radnike zaposlene na određeno vrijeme, na samozaposlene, na mlade, osobito one koji nisu zaposleni, ne obrazuju se niti osposobljavaju u regijama gdje je visoka stopa nezaposlenosti. Podaci koje smo u zadnje vrijeme vidjeli, da je Fond pomogao preko 15 700 radnika u prošloj godini i 73,5 milijuna eura i dodatnih 51 milijun eura iz državnih sredstava, bitan je da postigne rezultat, a uvjeren sam da će i Hrvatska, koja nije dosada imala priliku to koristiti, moći koristiti ovaj Fond u područjima poput brodogradnje i drugih ranjivih sektora gospodarstva.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, ba mhaith liom ar dtús mo chara agus mo chomhghleacaí Éireannach, Marian Harkin, a mholadh as an dea-obair, agus go deimhin an gaisce atá déanta aici agus ag a comhghleacaithe maidir leis an tuarascáil seo.

Rinne siad gaisce ar dhá leibhéal: gur éirigh leo an ciste a choimeád don chéad tréimhse airgeadais eile, nuair a thuigeann tú go raibh cuid de na Ballstáit is cumhachtaí ina gcoinne; agus go bhfuil leasuithe chun feabhais tugtha isteach acu, go háirithe go bhfuil na rialacha solúbtha agus go bhfuil na téarmaí níos leithne, á chur san áireamh iontu daoine nach bhfuil aon jab acu agus daoine atá ag obair dóibh féin.

Caithfidh mé a rá gur úsáideadh an ciste seo ceithre huaire i mo thoghcheantar féin agus go raibh an ceann deireanach i bhfad níos fearr ná an chéad cheann, is é sin go raibh sé níor fearr i gcás Talk Talk ná a bhí i gcás Dell. Taispeánann sé sin nuair a théann údaráis riaracháin sna Ballstáit i dtaithí ar rialacha go mbíonn níos mó tairbhe ann do na hoibrithe.

Beidh an cás sin níos fearr amach anseo de bharr na leasuithe seo.

(Τέλος παρεμβάσεων με τη διαδικασία "catch the eye")

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank everyone for the very supportive voices towards the Globalisation Adjustment Fund. Indeed, the European Commission is determined to make full use of this Fund in the future for the benefit of the workers who need its support and to help the recovery of the European economy.

Indeed, the EGF in the future will be smaller than what the Commission originally proposed. I am glad that the proposed improvements are appreciated by the House, perhaps most importantly the possible improvement in terms of the speed of project evaluation, decision and disbursement. Indeed, I appreciate that it is not only the Commission but also the European Parliament that has decided to shorten its approval procedures substantially.

In reality, much faster decision-making would only be possible if the EGF had its own envelope. As you know, it has been and it will continue to be an extra-budgetary fund. Every single project will have to be an individual legal proposal and that requires a codecision by the Parliament and the Council. Nevertheless, we believe it is possible to cut the time demand and this will be appreciated and it will be seen as more useful instrument.

As you know, the EGF is indeed a demand-driven fund. The finally agreed budget ceiling – while still very relevant – is nevertheless substantially lower than what the Commission proposed. We also opened it up towards farmers, towards young people, while emphasising that this is not the main financial instrument for supporting either farmers or young unemployed people. Nevertheless, this opening should be appreciated.

I very much agree with those who stress the importance of prevention, meaning that other policies, such as macroeconomic or industrial policies, are very important in order to ensure that in the future fewer workers find themselves in a situation requiring intervention from the EGF. That means that we have to do more in the future for good anticipation and management of change.

This is why the Commission will very soon come forward with a Quality Framework on restructuring. The key indeed is anticipation, but also constant investment in human capital that highlights the importance of the competitiveness of the workforce, employability, investment in skills and improving the performance of the education and training systems and their connection with companies in the real economy.

This also highlights the importance of trade policies, an area in which of course there has to be a reflection of the social dimension of the European economy. Let us hope that the economic situation in the European Union will not require more than the funding which has now become available for the future EGF and that it will be used by the EU institutions and the Member States in the most effective way.

  Marian Harkin, rapporteur. − Madam President, I agree with the Commissioner, who said it was a difficult path but it was certainly well worth taking. I look forward very much to the new proposal on good anticipation and management of change.

Just a few comments to sum up the comments that were made by my colleagues. First of all, in regard to agriculture: farmers as individuals can apply, but as a response to trade deals that disadvantage farmers this would be totally inadequate. I believe it might indeed have provided a fig leaf to the Trade Commissioner, if he was so inclined to do a poor deal for agriculture, but the fund itself would have been totally inadequate to respond to the needs of agriculture.

I agree with Ms Bauer, I would have liked to see differentiated co-financing, and Ms Zuber mentioned this point as well. Ms Cornelissen talked about success stories with older workers and how the fund improved the prospects of workers with low educational attainment. Mr Clark, as well as Mr Kelly, spoke about the Dell workers and indeed it is of interest to know that I consulted with the Dell workers on a number of occasions, to try to improve the effectiveness of the functioning of this fund.

Mr Clark spoke about companies closing, and indeed they do, for many reasons, but at least if it is for globalisation we have this fund to assist them. I disagree with what Ms van der Kammen said about the use of this fund; the fund only assists workers. It does not under any circumstances fund the responsibilities of Member States or companies. Mr Mann spoke of the need to ensure that people have the appropriate skills and we have written into the legislation that the package of services should anticipate future labour market shortages and required skills.

Ms Costello spoke about the fact that Irish workers have benefited, as have workers in 20 Member States, so that indicates the fund’s effectiveness and the need for it,

Finally, I agree with Mr Daerden; he said we ensured the survival of the fund, but only just. But it was worth doing, because it is a solidarity instrument. It delivers a strong message to European workers, along with tangible benefits, and that is worth doing.

  Πρόεδρος. - Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί αύριο, Τετάρτη 11 Δεκεμβρίου 2013, στις 12.30.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 149)

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), în scris. – O prioritate a Strategiei Europa 2020 este realizarea unor investiţii pentru dezvoltarea competențelor, combaterea sărăciei, modernizarea sistemelor de formare și de protecție socială în vederea asigurării unei creșteri favorabile incluziunii. Pe de altă parte, crearea de noi locuri de muncă pe tot teritoriul Uniunii și elaborarea unor politici ferme de sprijinire a cetățenilor europeni pentru a anticipa și gestiona schimbările va permite totodată combaterea efectelor globalizării. Soluţia adoptată de UE este tocmai Fond european de ajustare la globalizare FEG, care îşi propune să demonstreze solidaritatea Uniunii și sprijinul față de lucrătorii concediați ca urmare a schimbărilor structurale majore din cadrul modelelor comerciale mondiale cauzate de globalizare. Consider benefică propunerea privind majorarea ratei de cofinanțare la 65% pentru anumite state membre, având în vedere că, nivelul de 50% s-a dovedit a fi un impediment pentru o utilizare mai mare şi mai adecvată a fondului. În plus, este important să fie imbunătăţită cooperarea dintre UE şi statele membre pentru a scurta termenul de intervenţie pentru a obţine un răspuns mai rapid la concedierile planificate sau anunțate și a aplica măsurile imediat ce sunt depuse cererile pentru accesarea fondului.

  Iosif Matula (PPE), în scris. – Începând din 2007, Fondul European de Ajustare la Globalizare (FEG) își dovedește solidaritatea față de lucrătorii europeni afectați de concedieri, contribuind la creșterea economică și sustenabilă, precum și la ocuparea durabilă a forței de muncă. Salut succesul înregistrat ca urmare a mobilizării FEG pentru cei 1.416 lucrători concediați de Nokia în România, după închiderea fabricii din județul Cluj. În urma implementării proiectului ”Centrul de Tranziție de la Job la SmartJob”, finanțat prin FEG, din cei 1.416 disponibilizați, 1.176 (83 %) au fost reintegrați pe piața muncii. Dat fiind numărul mare de concedieri recente cauzate de criza economică și financiară, extinderea domeniului de aplicare a FEG reprezintă un instrument important pentru a oferi sprijin în procesul de reconversie profesională a lucrătorilor din diverse sectoare industriale afectate de criză. Concomitent, aplicarea FEG în regiunile cu rate ridicate ale șomajului în rândul tinerilor, pentru tinerii care nu sunt încadrați profesional și nu urmează niciun program educațional sau de formare, reprezintă un angajament de solidaritate menit să asigure dezvoltarea durabilă a regiunilor.

  Vojtěch Mynář (S&D), písemně. – Evropský fond pro přizpůsobení se globalizaci považuji za jedno z efektivních prorůstových opatření, jak napomoci tvorbě pracovních míst podporou propuštěných pracovníků. Nový Fond na období 2014–2020 navazuje na úspěch předchozího, kdy byla míra opětovného zaměstnání min. 48,1 %. Je vhodné, že došlo k rozšíření kategorie podpořených pracovníků a kapitoly nezaměstnanosti mladých. Vítám i nárůst míry spolufinancování na 60 % z původních 50 %, jak navrhovala Komise. Zaveden je i limit pro finanční podporu 35 % z celkových nákladů, který zaručí, že pracovníci budou mít prospěch zejména z odborných školení a profesního poradenství, a tudíž členské státy nebudou moci využívat fond jako náhradu za podporu v nezaměstnanosti. Jsem přesvědčen, že nový fond bude znamenat příležitost oživení pro kraje s vysokou nezaměstnaností, u nás doma pro kraj Moravskoslezský a Severní Čechy. Česká republika za uplynulé období čerpala z rozpočtu v porovnání s ostatními státy nejméně, jen 300 tisíc EUR oproti 60 milionům EUR pro nejúspěšnější Itálii. To musíme společně s novou vládou napravit. Nesmíme však zapomenout, že tento fond je určen na podporu „měkkých“ projektů a pro zajištění budoucí konkurenceschopnosti evropského průmyslu se neobejde bez koncepčních investic, jaké navrhuje též strategie RISE vedoucí k obnově evropského průmyslu.

  Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE), în scris. – Acest instrument financiar s-a dovedit a fi cel mai eficient și rapid mijloc prin care Uniunea Europeană a răspuns unor cerințe punctuale de finanțare ale unor State Membre, în care unele întreprinderi au fost obligate să concedieze un numar mare de muncitori, în urma impactului globalizarii și al crizei financiare. România a beneficiat de un ajutor financiar din acest fond în urma deciziei Companiei Nokia de a înceta activitatea la fabrica sa din județul Cluj. Banii au fost folosiți pentru recalificarea muncitorilor concediați. Proiectul a fost de succes, majoritatea muncitorilor au gasit un nou loc de muncă. Iata de ce voi susține acest raport.