# CE2004078EN.01004901.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/49

---

(2004/C 78 E/0047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1831/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject:   Statistics concerning poverty and unemployment in Greece

Subject:

On 16 May 2003 it was announced that another Greek company, the ‘Yvonni Stores’ chain of beauty products, had failed, resulting in job losses for over 100 women. This unfortunate development follows the recent closure of the Siser-Palko factory ten days ago resulting in placing a further 500 Greek women out of work. According to Eurostat statistics (Communication 8/2003 and Press Release 43/2002) published in ‘Agence Europe’ on 10 May 2003, statistics for ‘total long-term unemployment’ and ‘total very long-term unemployment’ in Greece between 60 and 70 % higher than the Community average. The poverty risk is 21 % in Greece and Portugal, higher than in all other EU Member States.

Furthermore, ‘long-term unemployment’ and ‘very long-term unemployment’ indicators are much higher than the Community average for both men and women, unemployment among women giving particular cause for concern; the ‘long-term unemployment’ indicator being 8,7 (Community average: 3,7), while for very long-term unemployment' it is 5,1 in Greece as opposed to 2,4 in the EU as a whole. Furthermore, according to the European Community Household Panel (ECHP), the indicator for those who have been poor at least once in their life is 25,1 in Greece (EU 19,2), while the indicator for those in a permanent state of poverty in Greece is 6,5 (EU 3,8). (Information published by Agence Europe on 10 May 2003).

What view does the Commission take of the persistent and long-term unemployment in Greece, coupled with the high poverty levels? Does it have statistics regarding the number of enterprises which have closed down since 1994 in Greece? How many have transferred to countries outside the EU and what is the total number of job losses in Greece? Has the Commission made any recommendations to the Greek authorities concerning measures to contain the problem and, if so, what was their response?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2003)

(24 July 2003)

Long-term unemployment is a key structural problem in the labour market. It affects the most disadvantaged groups of the population, women and young people, and it drives individuals towards inactivity and social exclusion. The Greek employment situation, as presented in the 2002 National Action Plan for Employment, shows that although long-term unemployment in the country is declining, it continues to lie above the Union's average. In addition, the rate of long-term unemployment to the overall unemployment rate is higher than the Union's average.

The Commission's view is that long-term unemployment needs to be further reduced in order to achieve an inclusive labour market; in spite of the progress made, the employment position of disadvantaged people remains weak. This calls for better tailored policies, comprehensive approaches involving both supply and demand and a close link with the wider policies of social inclusion.

This is clearly stated in the Joint Employment Report and through the Union's recommendations addressed to Greece. The Commission's view is that the reform of the Public Employment Services (PES) and the establishment of the preventive and individualised approach (taking into account the personal characteristics of the people concerned), will be a major tool in the fight against long-term unemployment. This is also evident in the ‘Prevention and activation’ recommendation which states, ‘complete the restructuring of the public employment services and fully implement the preventive and individualised approach, in particular for women and young people; further upgrade statistical systems so that indicators on prevention and activation are available in good time and progress can be effectively monitored.’

The Greek Authorities have responded to the above recommendation, both through legislative measures to promote the reorganisation of the Greek Manpower Employment Organisation (OAED) and by setting up new Employment Promotion Centres.

Moreover, the 2001 National Action Plan against poverty and social exclusion has represented an important tool in the fight against poverty over the last two years — a process which is still ongoing in the drafting of the plan for 2003-2005. The clear link between access to the labour market and monetary poverty will be recognised in the Joint Inclusion Report 2003: for example the common list of indicators adopted at the Laeken European Council (14 and 15 December 2001) adopts several indicators relating to employment status, and includes breakdowns of poverty risk by activity status. Furthermore, statistics on poverty dynamics from the European Community Household Panel suggest that poverty reduction following re-integration into the labour market after a spell of unemployment — however short — is not easily achieved. On average, persons who are at risk of poverty in Greece have an income which falls far below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold.

The any-time at-risk-of-poverty rate (within the duration of the European Community Household Panel (ECHP) 1995-2000) is 38 % for Greece which is similar to Spain, Ireland and Italy, lower than Portugal (40 %) but higher than other Member States (EU 15 average: 30 %). This does not take into account prior lifetime exposure to poverty risk. The persistent at-risk-of-poverty measure is generally preferred to the continuous measure to avoid the ‘windfall’ situation where the incomes of persons at risk rise just above the threshold in one year but then fall back.

It is worth noting that the European Social Fund (ESF) is active in Greece in the area of employment and social inclusion and finances measures aimed at the improvement of employability and the promotion of employment for vulnerable groups, including facilitation of access to the education and health systems.

The Commission has no statistical information concerning the number of enterprises that have closed down in Greece, how many have transferred to countries outside the Union or the total number of job losses concerned. However, according to Eurostat, a slight increase in employment has been observed from 1995 to 2002, especially in the services sector.

Finally, in the framework of the Community Support Framework for Greece for the period 2000-2006, the Commission finances measures to promote entrepreneurship (incentives to start-ups, training of new entrepreneurs), and to enhance the competitiveness of Greek enterprises (actions for the technological modernisation of existing firms).

---