WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2752/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Spending on social protection in the European Union
Date: 1998-09-10
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Ireland, Sweden, family benefit, gross domestic product, marginalisation, poverty, public expenditure, social cost, social-security benefit













EUR-Lex - 91998E2752 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2752

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2752/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Spending on social protection in the European Union  


Official Journal C 118 , 29/04/1999 P. 0135 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2752/98by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission(10 September 1998)Subject: Spending on social protection in the European UnionAccording to the Commission report (COM(98) 243 final) on social protection in Europe 1997, there continue to be major disparities in the expenditure of the Member States in this area, ranging from 20 and 21 % of GDP in Ireland and Greece respectively to 36 % in Sweden. Levels of unemployment benefit also vary, ranging from 60-65 % of a worker's salary in Denmark and France to 25 % in Greece. In the light of the above and the fact that, according to the same report, social benefits represent the main source of income for around 35 % of households in the European Union and that without them 40 % of households would be living in poverty, will the Commission say what measures it intends to take to harmonise social spending in the Member States and to reduce poverty, particularly in countries such as Greece, which has one of the lowest levels of social spending despite the fact that its regions are among the poorest in terms of per capita GDP?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission(22 October 1998)Each Member State is responsible for the organisation and financing of its own social protection system, and public expenditure on social protection in the Member States varies markedly between individual Member States, ranging from 20 % gross domestic product (GDP) in Ireland, to 36 % GDP in Sweden(1).In this context, however, it has to be emphasised that the level of public expenditure for social protection alone is not a comprehensive assessment of the level of social protection existing in a specific Member State. Effective transfers can, in principle, be made through tax concessions or allowances as well as through benefits payments and, in this case, will show up as lower receipts rather than expenditure. The strength of the public pillar within the overall social protection system of a Member State reflects not only the specific demographic structure, and in particular the structure of households and family, but also the relative importance of occupational schemes and private provisions.The Commission promotes co-operation between Member States in order to achieve a high degree of convergence of objectives and policies in the field of social protection. The Commission will present, at the end of 1998, a report on the implementation of Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC of 24 June 1992 on common criteria concerning sufficient resources and social assistance in social protection systems(2); and in early 1999, a communication including an assessment of the implementation of Council Recommendation 92/442/EEC of 27 July 1992 on the convergence of social protection objectives and policies2.The Treaty of Amsterdam introduces in Article 137 a new mandate for the Union to act to combat social exclusion.(1) Social Protection in Europe Report.(2) OJ L 245, 26.8.1992.