Mr President, Commissioner, I wish to begin by thanking Mr Herman Schmid for the unusually constructive cooperation that went into preparing this proposal, which I think is important. Employment policy is important on the whole. We now have a new framework to operate within, concerned with tighter coordination with the economic guidelines, more long-term thinking and more concentration upon the result of implementation in the Member States. We fully agree with this strategy. I wish to emphasise how important it is for the employment strategy to be put on the same footing as the economic guidelines so that they carry the same weight in this process. Allow me to say something about the overarching objectives. We have abandoned the pillar structure. The fact that we now have full employment as an objective is particularly important. It is also important, as Mr Herman Schmid says, to supplement the employment objective with an objective relating to unemployment. Even if these are two aspects that run approximately in tandem, they do not do so one hundred per cent. It may be the case that employment is increasing but that there still remains a high degree of unemployment. Another objective is work of good quality. In the future, Europe will not compete through cheap labour but through the quality of the products and services we are able to produce. For this, we need a properly educated labour force. Educating the labour force to make Europe competitive is clearly linked to lifelong learning. A third important issue is integration. It is not only a question of integration between regions, leading to a high level of employment – or full employment – throughout Europe, but also of there at present being groups that are, to a large extent, outside the labour market, for example people with disabilities and people from other countries. That is important. The equality aspects have already been talked about, and it is important that we highlight them. They had a pillar of their own in the previous strategy. It is also important that the national parliaments be involved and that it be possible to supplement the overarching common objectives by national objectives. Allow me briefly to say something about the disagreement. We need to resolve this in the committee. We have slightly different views of flexibility and security, but we shall succeed in agreeing on this point and saying that we need a balance. When it comes to the tax issue, I do not share Mr Mann’s view. You only have to look around in the European Union. Some of those countries that have the lowest unemployment and the highest levels of people in work do in actual fact also have the heaviest tax burden. This suggests to me that the tax issue is somewhat more complicated than appears from Mr Mann’s amendment. The level of employment is determined by a large number of factors. It is an over-simplification to say that, generally speaking, a reduction in tax is also good for employment. The fact is, it is not. I wish, however, to say that I shall vote in such a way that we preserve unity in this House. What would be worst of all is if we in Parliament were not to express our view, now that we have an opportunity to do so. I shall be guided by that consideration in the vote.

Political group: PSE