27 Amendments of Regina BASTOS related to 2013/2277(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the economic adjustment programme measures inat a time when there was a general economic and financial crisis and their particular economic situations were deteriorating, Greece (in May 2010 and March 2012), Ireland (in December 2010), Portugal (in May 2011) and Cyprus (in June 2013) sought the financial assistance of the EU, the euro area Member States, and the International Monetary Fund and agreed to economic adjustment programmes involving measures which have had a direct and indirect impact on employment levels and dire consequences for the social situationthe living conditions of many people; whereas, although all the programmes were formally signed by the Commission, they were designed, and their conditionality determined, jointly by the IMF, the Eurogroup, the European Central Bank (ECB) and, the Commission, and the Member States to be bailed out;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas in its resolution of 21 November 2013, Parliament welcomed the Commission communication of 2 October 2013 entitled ‘Strengthening the social dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union’ and its proposal to establish a scoreboard of key employment and social indicators to be included in the Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure (MIP) and the Joint Employment Report (JER), but regretted the fact that those indicators were insufficient to ensure comprehensive coverage of the Member States’ employment and social situations and the interdependence between them; whereas Parliament’s resolution stressed the need to ensure that this monitoring aims to reduce social divergences between Member Statesthe Joint Employment Report (JER);
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the available data show that in four countries the progress made towards achieving the Europe 2020 targets is rapidly declining (see Annex 1); whereas for Portugal, the situation is not the same in all indicators, the progress towards achievement of the Europe 2020 targets is mixed, while the trend is positive regarding the targets related to education, the trend in employment is more challenging;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the EU institutions (the ECB, the Commission and the Eurogroup) are fully co-responsible for the conditions imposed under the economic adjustment programmes, and therefore for their social consequencinvolved in drawing up the economic adjustment programmes;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the fact that Parliament has been completelythere is no legal basis and that this has caused Parliament to be marginalised during all phases of the project: the preparatory phase, the development of mandates and the monitoring of the results achieved by the programmes and related measures;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets the factConsiders it wrong that those programmes were designed without any assessment of the consequences by means of impact studies or coordination with the Employment Committee, the Social Protection Committee, the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO) or the Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs; regrets, too, the fact that, despite the important social implications, the consultative bodies established by Treaty, in particular the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions (CoR), were not consulted;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that since 2008 the EU has been going through an unprecedented economic and financial crisis;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Notes that the EU was ill-prepared and ill-equipped to deal with the problems that arose, not least the immense sovereign debt crisis within the Economic and Monetary Union;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Notes that the global economic and financial crisis has highlighted and exacerbated the fragility of public finances in the four countries;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Points out that the situation was such as to demand an immediate response, given that failure to act would have had serious consequences, and to leave the four countries with no alternative but to seek financial assistance in order to avert bankruptcy;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Points out that the short time allowed to implement the adjustment programmes and the failure to produce an accurate picture of the economies of the bailout Member States have been the main causes of the deterioration in the social situation in those countries;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Deplores the fact that the worsening economic and social situation in the four countries was not noticed in time, bearing in mind that, had that happened, measures could have been taken to mitigate the social consequences;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the adjustment policies and structural reforms in the four countries have lserved to dramaticincrease unemployment rates, historically high rates ofand job loss rates and worseningmake working conditions worse; points out that the consequences for activityemployment rates, in particular as regards the sustainability of social protection and pension systems, are even more serious because of the gap between the Europe 2020 targets and reality is rapidly growing ever wider;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that, according to Eurostat data, the unemployment rate in Portugal fell in November 2013, for the ninth month running, to 15.5%;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with great concern that it is young people who are suffering the highest levels of unemployment, with the situation in countries such as Greece, where the rate is over 50%, or Portugal and Ireland, where it is in excess of 30%, being quite devastatingparticularly serious; regrets the fact that even those young people who do find a job often find themselves working under precarious conditions or on part-time contracts which make it hard to live independently;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the plans being implemented in Portugal, including the active employment policies, are proving effective and that the youth unemployment rate has been falling;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Warns that, if not remedied, these huge divergences, especially in the case of the younger generation, willmight result in structural damage to the labour market of the four countries, limit their capacity for recovery, provoke massive forced migration with tremendous brain-drain effects and increase the persistent divergences between Member States supplying employment and those supplying a low-cost workforce;
Amendment 129 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. In Portugal, the vulnerable groups have been particularly targeted by Active Labour Market Policies aimed at facilitating their access to the labour market and a Social Emergency Programme was launched in October 2011, open to new measures and solutions or even to customised solutions, in order to protect the most vulnerable parts of the population from the effects of the economic adjustment;
Amendment 138 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that Eurostat and Commission figures and various studies show that between 2008 and 2012 income distribution inequality grew in the four countriesGreece, Ireland and Cyprus and declined in Portugal, and that the cuts in social and unemployment benefits resulting from austerity measures, as well as the wage reductions due to structural reforms, are raising poverty levels; notes that in Portugal, the number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion declined over the same period; notes, furthermore, that the Commission report found relatively high levels of in-work poverty due to low minimum wages being cut or frozen as a result of the austerity measures;
Amendment 144 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. DeploRegrets the fact that the level of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion has increased in the four countrieGreece, Ireland and Cyprus; points out that during the last three years alone, figures show that the proportion of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion has risen to 2615% in Portugal and to 15% in IrelandIreland, while in Portugal it fell from 26% to 25.3% between 2008 and 2012, according to Eurostat figures; notes, moreover, that these statistics hide a much harsher reality, which is that when GDP per capita falls, the poverty threshold also falls, meaning that we now consider to be out of poverty people who until recently were considered in poverty;
Amendment 160 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the fact that the levels of early school-leavers are falling in the four countries; notes, however, that this ismay be partially explained by the difficulty young people are facing in finding employment;
Amendment 163 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the fact that tertiary education attainment levels have been rising in all four countries; notes, however, that this ismay be partially explained by the need of young people to improve their future labour market chances;
Amendment 174 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets the fact that the programmes imposed on the four countries allow firms to opt out of collective bargaining agreements and to review sectoral wage agreements directly affecting the structure and values of collective bargaining arrangements set out in the respective national constitutions; notes that this resulted in a request by the ILO Expert Committee, in the case of Greece, to re- establish social dialogue, and, in the case of Portugal, for the Constitutional Court to annul certain legislative measures; stresses that this despicable situation is the consequence of having limited structural reforms involving only the deregulation of labour relations and wage cuts at any cost, which is in clear, which runs countradiction wither to the EU’s general objectives and the policies of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 181 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Notes that a social concertation agreement "Commitment for growth, competitiveness and employment" was signed in Portugal, in January of 2012, by all main Social Partners and Government;
Amendment 182 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Points out that there is no single solution that can be applied across all the Member States;
Amendment 189 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to carry out a detailed study of the social and economic consequences of the adjustment programmes in the four countries in order to provide a precise understanding of both the short-term and long-term damage to the employment and social protection systems, with particular regard to the fight against poverty, the maintaining of good social dialogue and the balance between flexibility and security in labour relations; calls on the Commission to use its consultative bodies when drafting this study, as well as the Employment Committee and the Social Protection Committee; suggests that the EESC be asked to draft a specific report;
Amendment 229 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses the need, in this context, to implement virtuous austerity measures that are concerned to ensure social justice and enable a balance to be reached between economic growth and employment, the implementation of structural reforms and budget consolidation in bailed-out Member States, and that are based on the values of the European Union;