Opinjonijiet fejn membri tal-Grupp tal-Ħaddiema huma relatur / korelatur / relatur ġenerali

Pages

Displaying 141 - 150 of 665
Adottati on 06/12/2017
Referenza: 
SOC/560-EESC-2017-01220-00-00-AC-TRA

Given the current and future threats to access social security faced by people in the new forms of work, the EESC recommends that the Member States and European courts regulate these new forms of employment. Member States should consider linking up the electronic systems of their health and pension insurance schemes with those of their tax administrations and making it mandatory that individuals generating professional income pay contributions. It should further be examined whether a part of the digitisation dividend could be used to ensure the sustainability of the social security systems.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: Sustainable social security and social protection systems in the digital era (own-initiative opinion)

Adottati on 06/12/2017
Referenza: 
SOC/529-EESC-2017-02275-00-01-AC-TRA

The EESC thinks the "work-life balance" package is a step in the right direction, to be further analysed and be improved in the future. Social partners throughout Europe should be encouraged to examine additional practical solutions to promote a work-life balance that suits the specificities of workplaces, particularly in SMEs. Moreover, there is need for investment in high-quality, affordable and available care services and facilities for all families, as well as for tax deductions that help working parents to continue working.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: The challenges of work-life balance faced by working parents and caregivers

Adottati on 19/10/2017
Referenza: 
ECO/440-EESC-2017-03297-00-00-ac-tra

The EESC is in favour of creating a Pan-European personal pension product – PEPP but is unclear as to whether the investment arising from this initiative will remain within the EU and on the impact on labour mobility across the EU. Every effort, by way of tax relief, should be provided to encourage as many workers as possible to take up personal pension products. The EESC emphasises the need for consumer protection and risk mitigation for savers during the course of their working lives and on retirement. The EESC also underlines the importance of the role of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) in monitoring the market and national supervisory regimes with a view to achieving convergence and consistency across the EU especially regarding the governance structure for PEPPs within any provider.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: pan-European personal pension product

Adottati on 19/10/2017
Referenza: 
ECO/435-EESC-2017-02837-00-00-ac-tra

This opinion is part of a wider package of four EESC opinions on the future of the European economy (Deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union and Euro area economic policy, Capital Markets Union and The future of EU finances). The package of opinions underscores the need for a common sense of purpose in the Union governance, which goes far beyond technical approaches and measures, and is first and foremost a matter of political will and a common perspective. For this reason, the EESC considers it essential to have a balanced mix of euro area economic policies, with their monetary, fiscal and structural components properly interlinked. The Committee notes the improving economic situation in the euro area and recommends that, in order to maintain and bolster this, crucial steps be taken to stimulate investment and carry out reforms, while also strengthening the social and democratic dimensions of euro area governance.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: Euro area economic policy (additional opinion)

Adottati on 19/10/2017
Referenza: 
ECO/439-EESC-2017-03447-00-00-ac-tra

This opinion is part of a wider package of four EESC opinions on the future of the European economy (Deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union and Euro area economic policy, Capital Markets Union and The future of EU finances). The package of opinions underscores the need for a common sense of purpose in the Union governance, which goes far beyond technical approaches and measures, and is first and foremost a matter of political will and a common perspective. Europeans need more (and better) Europe, not less Europe, in order to overcome the political crisis in the EU. The basic principle of the EU budget must be to deliver European added value, achieving better outcomes than would be possible for uncoordinated national budgets acting individually. The EESC considers that it is not credible for the EU budget to continue to be less than 1% of EU-GNI.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: The future of EU finances up to 2025 (White Paper – reflection paper)

Adottati on 18/10/2017
Referenza: 
REX/487-EESC-2017

The EESC is a strong advocate of a fair, well-administered and sustainable development policy at EU level. It is also very committed to the cause of greater tax justice. In recent years, questions have been raised as to whether the international tax policies of the Member States, in particular the concluding of certain types of double taxation agreements, are consistent with EU development policy objectives.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: EU development partnerships and the challenge posed by international tax agreements (own-initiative opinion)

Adottati on 18/10/2017
Referenza: 
INT/827-EESC-2017-03111-00-00-AC-TRA

With this opinion, the EESC welcomes the proposal to monitor and disseminate CO2 readings of HDVs newly registered in EU, and provides customers with clear information concerning consumption. A balance should be striked between targets that can be achieved in the short to medium-term and the longer-term goal of zero-emission road transport.

Opinjoni tal-KESE: Monitoring and reporting of Co2 emissions from and fuel consumption of new heavy duty vehicles

Adottati on 21/09/2017
Referenza: 
INT/817-EESC-2017-01443-00-00-ac-tra

Impact assessments of any legislative proposals must be integrated and accorded due importance to the economic, social and environmental dimensions, including for SMEs. The Committee has called for the Parliament, the Council and the European Commission to agree on a common methodology on impact assessments and evaluations, which could also serve as a prompt for the Committee. It is extremely concerned by the findings on the shortcomings of social and environmental impact assessments and the follow-up to consultations. It calls on the Commission to be more transparent and to give fully documented reasons why a particular measure or proposal is or is not to be submitted for impact assessment and/or an ex-post analysis.

Pages