Oral explanations of vote

  Rory Palmer (S&D). – Madam President, let me quote: ‘Employees are leaving left, right and centre, being suspended and sacked at every opportunity, it’s an awful environment to work in. The ballot results are in, and we’re going to strike.’ That’s a worker at Wilko in my constituency who will take industrial action tomorrow with their trade union, the GMB. Wilko’s used to be a good family firm with strong values and a commitment to the local community. Sadly, it has moved away from that and I want to give my full support to the workforce at Wilko’s taking action tomorrow against new working practices, against new working arrangements, which will force workers to spend less time with their families, more weekend work. This has been imposed on those workers in an atrocious, unfair way, and those workers, their trade union the GMB, taking that action tomorrow, have my full support.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, také zde, v tomto případě bych chtěla vysvětlit, proč jsem nakonec hlasovala pro tuto zprávu. Obsahuje totiž návrhy, které si myslím, že je důležité, aby Evropská unie ze své úrovně podporovala a vytvářela určitý tlak na všechny státy, aby zde nebyly země s různými rychlostmi. Zejména přístup k zaměstnávání mladých lidí: zde již máme určité evropské nástroje, kterými členské státy by měly a mají možnost daleko více podpořit mladé lidi, jako jsou Erasmus, Evropský sociální fond, Evropský sbor solidarity. Takže jde jen o to, aby evropské státy byly aktivní. Stejně tak je důležitá otázka vzdělávání, kvality, dostupnosti, vzájemné uznávání kvalifikací. Nesouhlasím s unifikací evropského systému zajištění pro případ nezaměstnanosti, ale souhlasím s tím, aby zde byla určitá úroveň koordinace a nastavení společných minimálních standardů. Je to důležité.

  Claire Fox (NI). – Madam President, I abstained on this motion because despite the great sentiments on tackling unemployment and workers’ rights and benefits, there’s a big ‘but’. The EU likes to tell us that trade union rights and workers’ rights are guaranteed by the EU but that’s fake news. They’ve been historically fought for by millions of ordinary people taking on their bosses and governments, and yet you reduce these struggles to paternalistically handing out rights like crumbs with more bureaucracy added on. And also, isn’t it virtue signalling? How will all this rhetoric about rights go down in Greece and Italy and so many eurozone countries which have been punished by the EU, which imposed austerity, the misery of poverty and unemployment, and humiliated nation states by telling them they couldn’t decide on their own economic policies?

So I abstain because I agree with supporting workers’ rights and unemployment, but I don’t trust you lot to do it, I’m afraid, and I appeal to my fellow Europeans who support workers’ rights to not rely on the bureaucrats here in Brussels.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Уважаема г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, докладът е доста балансиран. Основният му фокус е да стимулира държавите членки да постигат по-голям баланс между икономическите и социалните измерения. Част от приоритетите в текста, които мога да подкрепя, са насърчаване на цифровите умения и предприемачеството, особено в малките и средните предприятия.

Същият документ обаче съдържа отново призиви за по-голям натиск върху държавите членки и политики относно мигрантите. Отново както и преди два доклада, които обсъдих, в смислени текстове се вкарват политики, свързани с нелегалната имиграция, насърчаването ѝ и изобщо тези дейности на неправителствените организации, които не подкрепям и отхвърлям. Такива текстове категорично не мога да подкрепя.

Смятам, че документът не отчита достатъчно и принципа на субсидиарност, т.е. правата на държавите членки да решават своите вътрешни въпроси с вътрешно законодателство. Затова, отчитайки положителните страни на доклада, гласувах с „въздържал се“.