Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it was certainly a sensible initiative on the part of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities to compile a report on the Commission’s annual reports concerning equal opportunities for men and women in the European Union, covering the period from 1997 to 1999. These reports have confirmed what we were all already fully aware of. The situation is far from hunky-dory when it comes to equal treatment and equal opportunities for men and women within the EU, despite the fact that the first equal treatment directive concerning equal pay for men and women came into force as long as 25 years ago, and Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome, which came into force in 1957, made provision for the elimination of wage discrimination against women. That was over 40 years ago. After all, we are already discussing the Fifth Action Programme on the equal treatment of men and women. Mrs Dybkjær’s report contains another long list of demands and wishes directed at the Commission, particularly in respect of inquiries, which I do not, however, necessarily consider to be indispensable. But we all know only too well where the real problems lie, and that the lack of political will – particularly in the Member States – the lack of willingness on the part of the social partners, the hesitancy of the political parties when it comes to involving more women in the decision-making processes, and also –let us be honest about this – the mentality of many men and women, are responsible for this unsatisfactory state of affairs. Once again, we have been left in no doubt on that score. What I do not see in this report, Commissioner, are calls for the Commission to at last get round to following up Parliament’s very specific proposals. We have a far more pressing need for concrete legislative proposals from the Commission, than we do for studies and fine declarations and speeches. Firstly, improvements are called for in the existing directives, for example those covering equality of opportunity in the sphere of social security, with respect to public and company schemes. I would remind you, in this connection, of our report on the splitting of pension rights in the event of divorce, as a result of which, payments for surviving relatives and the retirement age are to be included in the 1979 directive. I would put you in mind of the overdue improvements made to the 'caffeine-free' free directive of 1986 concerning equal rights for self-employed people, including spouses that help out – those millions of invisible workers, most of whom are women – and whom are engaged in small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises without any form of social security. Five years ago, we unanimously adopted an excellent report on this subject, one of our demands being a framework statute for spouses that help out in the family business. There were two sessions of round-table talks organised by the Commission, and we have not heard another word since. That was three years ago. What we really need is for the Commission to at last come up with concrete, legislative proposals, instead of frittering away time and money on reports and inquiries, and wasting time that would be better spent on worthwhile legislative work. The Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities would also do well to take this advice to heart.

Political group: PPE-DE