The demographic future of Europe (debate) President The next item is the report by Mrs Castex, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, on the demographic future of Europe. Françoise Castex Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the debate we are continuing this evening began within these walls several years ago. It will not end with the adoption of this report, which still leaves some questions unanswered, and which we will undoubtedly have to come back to in the near future. In any case, I would like to thank the Commission for the quality of its communication, which has enriched the debate, and we have benefited from it in the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. In my report, I develop the consequences of demographic change, i.e. the shrinking of the active population, the growing number of elderly people, and the demographic imbalances between different regions of Europe. Is this to say it is impossible to act on the causes? I would first like to remind you that the 20th century saw two vast changes. Firstly, women gained access to education and training on the same footing as men. Secondly, women gained control over their reproductive lives through contraception. These are two factors of women's emancipation. They mark great, and I hope irreversible, progress for humanity. However, to have all the information for analysis at hand, two other things need to be added as well. All the studies show that European citizens would like more children than they actually have, and secondly, in Member States where the employment rate among women is high, the birth rate is also high. An active working life therefore does not prevent people from having children, provided that there is reconciliation of work life and family life for everyone, men and women alike. There is still a lot of progress to be made in this area, in all Member States. Another point arose during our discussions, one that nobody essentially disputes. Economic insecurity and fear of the future are important factors behind the drop in the birth rate. When it is difficult to plan for the future, people hesitate to have children. This is a key point, and I think that the drop in birth rate recorded in the European Union is a serious warning from this point of view. To regain confidence in the future, our citizens need their job security and dignified living conditions restored. Enough of the causes, what about the consequences? The main consequence is a reduction in the active population, falling from 331 million in 2010 to around 268 million by 2050. How can we maintain Europe's growth and competitiveness with a tiny active population? This is where the title of the communication takes on real meaning, Commissioner, and real force: turning a challenge into an opportunity. Europe still has some very high unemployment rates today, and the margin for progress in the employment of women, young people and older people, for whom the employment rate drops dramatically from the age of 52-55 years, remains great. Is not the real opportunity of this demographic challenge, the objective of full employment, which is finally realistic, finally achievable and finally necessary? To achieve it we must implement a genuine human resources management policy and a real lifelong training policy. I say lifelong with reason, for that also means for employees over 50 who, along with other types of discrimination, also have to face discrimination on training and on promotion at work. In my report, I put forward the concept of the active life-cycle to stress the need to consider a period of active life of around forty years - though it is up to the Member States to decide - of continuous employment, training, requalification, potential promotion, from the beginning to the end of a person's active life. Before considering raising the retirement age, it is necessary to make sure that everyone below that age is able to work, to exploit their skills and professional experience. It is because there is a legal retirement age that people can think of going beyond it, depending on the arrangements defined by each Member State in line with its traditions of dialogue and consultation. On this point, the debate remains open. The last point I would like to mention quickly is of course the use of immigration. There is much discussion of it making up for the drop in the active population, but immigration also stirs up a great deal of tension, as you know. For this reason I recommend a clear and reasoned approach to this issue. Immigration is not a new phenomenon in the European Union and, with a positive balance of two million immigrants per year - a figure that has been stable for several years - legal immigration contributes to the composition of the active population of the European Union, just as it contributes to the composition of European society. We need to maintain this flow of immigrants and guarantee a legal status in our Member States for those we welcome, in particular fighting illegal immigration and the exploitation of illegal workers. The human dimension of immigration must govern our policies on the subject and family integration should not disappear from our guidelines. In a provisional conclusion to this presentation, I would like to recall that, behind the average birth rates, the age pyramids and the ratios lie the issues of birth, motherhood, the place of women in society, the care we give to our elderly and the way we ourselves wish to end our lives. That is the reason why this debate is as interesting as it is impassioned, and I would also like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs for taking as much interest in this as I have. Vladimír Špidla Member of the Commission. - (CS) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank all the Members of the European Parliament and above all the rapporteur, Mrs Castex, for her informative report on the Commission communication on the demographic future of Europe. I am particularly pleased by the fact that besides the Committee on Employment there were four other parliamentary committees dealing with this report: the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, and the Committee on Regional Development. This clearly gives the Member States a stronger political signal and indicates the importance of demographic issues in Europe today. The European Parliament's analysis of the main demographic issues is to a great extent in line with the conclusions of the Commission's 2007 report. Both agree that ageing and declining birth rates are the result of social and economic development. Moreover, both Parliament and the Commission share the view that it is possible to respond to these phenomena constructively and successfully. Demographic changes present not only serious challenges but also new opportunities. The report points out, however, that it is important to respond both to the challenges and the opportunities now. It is encouraging to see that the political response and measures outlined in the report more or less correspond to the Commission's proposals. Family policy is the sole responsibility of individual Member States. However, as the report rightly states, the European Union also a role has a role to play. The revised Lisbon Strategy provides a framework for modernising family policy through support for equal opportunities and above all support for initiatives aimed at attaining a better work/life balance. In this regard, we are happy to see the new European Alliance for Families, which was established at the European Council meeting in spring 2007. This Alliance represents another platform at EU level for the exchange of experience among Member States. The report also rightly emphasises the changing relationship between the working and non-working sectors, stressing that the Member States will have to take all possible measures to deal with future shortages of workers in the labour market. They must first and foremost increase the participation in the labour market of young people, women and older people. There are a number of specific steps, which can and must be taken. Ladies and gentlemen, let me mention migration briefly once again as it is such an important and sensitive area. It is quite clear that inward and outward migration are part and parcel of European history and the European way of life. It is vital to support integration from the start, rather than seeing migration solely as a security or policing issue. Migration is part of our European way of life and for the most part has positive and necessary effects for us all. In conclusion, I would like to mention the issue of infertility. The European Parliament report draws attention to the increasing occurrence of infertility in couples: we know that there are some purely medical phenomena or causes of this problem, but it is also clearly connected to social conditions, in particular to couples postponing starting a family. I just want to reiterate that we must approach this issue in a coherent and comprehensive manner, not just from a medical standpoint. Ladies and gentlemen, there is a long list of people waiting to join in the debate, so I will conclude my contribution and look forward to the discussion that will follow. Bilyana Ilieva Raeva (Rapporteur on the Commission's Opinion for the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs) - (BG) Dear Mr. Commissioner, Dear Mr. Chairman, The overall demographic picture in Europe is very alarming. According to the Eurostat forecasts, the population in the 15 to 64 age bracket will be reduced by one million persons per year after 2010. This trend is due to two factors. Life expectancy continues to grow in all EU Member States, which is a very positive development resulting from the good quality of life in the Community. However, it is an alarming fact that, at the same time, birth rates are very low, which leads to growing share of the ageing population. It is this situation that brings about reduction of the share of people in the active age bracket and drop in labour productivity. The demographic problem threatens the stability of the European economy, the European social model, as well as the solidarity between generations. In this context, I commend the European Commission's initiative to develop a common European demographic strategy as the only adequate way to meet this global challenge. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament lays the emphasis on the economic tools that give opportunities to improve the demographic situation in the European Union. The proposed texts point to several major lines of action, including: development of sustainable and balanced public finance; promotion of diverse financial instruments with guaranteed transparency and security; use of tax concessions for companies hiring aged employees; acceleration of the labouyr market liberalization process, or internal migration, to quote Commissioner Spidla in the enlarged EU even before 2014; encouragement of employment among young people and those with family responsibilities through innovative work schemes such as shift work, part-time work, and lifelong learning. The emphasis is laid on the need for the Member States to fulfill their commitments under the Stability and Growth Pact as a way to overcome demographic challenges. The text includes also some more flexible mechanisms for voluntary retention of people above the minimumk retirement age according to the "salary and pension” formula. The main idea is that if we wish to live up to the demographic challenges, we have to support the establishment of mechanisms enabling flexible employment forms and to encourage the voluntary continuation of active life even after the minimum retirement age. Elisabeth Schroedter Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the effects of demographic change are very varied. While the outskirts of Paris are shaken time and time again by social unrest owing to the high rate of migration, in Brandenburg, where I come from, the regions are dwindling, people are moving away and the population is aging much more rapidly. The ageing society places a burden on public budgets, with social benefits to be paid, and the Lisbon Strategy has undertaken to reduce these. However, in light of the real causes of demographic change, I wonder whether this reduction might not be counterproductive for the Lisbon Strategy. The Commission is making it fairly easy to blame women for the ageing of society, because they are not having enough children, but the real reasons are current and past political errors. I would like to address just three of the points that have brought this imbalance in society into being. The first point is that analyses show that people do in fact want to have children, but parents - not just women - do not have children because the framework conditions are not right, because they do not have any social security, because - as has already been said - it is more difficult for parents to find employment and because career and family cannot be combined. The solution to this would be a totally new paradigm in relation to work-life balance. The key would be to divide time for family and career equally between the sexes; the Dublin Foundation has carried out some excellent research on this. It is also vital that children are not seen as little tickets to poverty, as is the case in many Member States. For policies of the Member States, what this means is sustainability in the social security system and, although this is an unpopular cost factor, it would put demographic change back on an even keel. An interesting study carried out in the region that I come from illustrates the second aspect. In this study, it was established that young women were moving out of the area not because of the problems of combining work and family, but because of massive discrimination that started as soon as they left school. They are top people, the best in the class, the top graduates, yet they are still offered places on the lower-quality training courses and poorer opportunities to advance their careers. This means, then, that the European Commission can really be effective in the area where it really has competence, that is, in matters of gender mainstreaming - equal opportunities for men and women - to combat discrimination by introducing improvements to legislation and particularly by exerting pressure on Member States to implement legislation so that things finally get moving. Thirdly, as draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development, I would like to come back to the topic of the declining regions. In our opinion, we are critical of the way in which the state administrations are still erecting huge barriers to effective involvement by citizens and to the development of innovation and creativity. By doing this, they are hindering plans for successful regional development. At the same time, there is a tendency for political leaders to simply write off regions, to withdraw from them claiming that the state has a responsibility to provide basic needs, to simply give up on them. This is no solution for Europe because over the long term, over generations - as history shows - it will become incredibly expensive. In reality, it is the task of the state administrations to pick up on the impetus provided by civil society and cooperate with it to pull the regions out of this dilemma. In this connection, I call on the European Commission to pick up on input from civil society especially, to promote civil society by coordinating the exchange of experience between regions where things are going well and highlighting good examples of tried and tested practice. These are concrete solutions in which the European Commission can be active without always holding women responsible for demographic change. Magda Kósáné Kovács draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. - (HU) Thank you, Mr President. For decades, we have been learning that climate change and pollution of the environment threaten our future. The Hampton Court summit drew our attention to another process that is becoming risky: Europe is growing old. Based on the responsibility it feels in this area, the LIBE Committee made three recommendations to the rapporteur and the EMPLOI Committee on matters relating to civil rights. I would like to thank them for studying our recommendations and taking them into account. The first area is support for families and children. Legislating on family support systems falls under national jurisdiction, and yet the assumption of obligations in respect of families with children is also a moral question, and an important part of European values. Equal opportunities for families with and without children are an extremely important Community interest. The basis for ensuring the rights of children, however, is that future generations should also feel responsible for the world outside the family. After analysing the legal and illegal forms of migration, LIBE has drawn attention to the fact that the requirements of an ageing society and of the labour market require a consistent, complex migration policy. We are delighted that the report goes into this in detail. In the year of cultural diversity, I might add that, according to experts and science, there may be a direct relationship between migration and the rate of population growth, since the large number of children in second-generation immigrant families is falling, while the presence of immigrants may change the desire of the host population to have children. Ultimately, discrimination against the elderly and older workers may prevent people who are not young from staying in the labour market. I would like to emphasise that they cannot be forced to work longer, they must have a real opportunity to choose, and lifelong learning is necessary for this. Familiarisation with modern communications technology improves their chances of finding work and opens windows to the global world of elderly people. In its opinion, LIBE asked the Commission repeatedly to make a recommendation on a general anti-discrimination directive, and we hope that this report will speed up the process. Thank you, Mr President. Karin Resetarits Mr President, indeed, why are we women having fewer children? The multitude of reasons and proposed political solutions are contained in the opinion of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality. My fellow Member Mrs Castex has already successfully incorporated almost all of it in her report. Thank you, Mrs Castex. How, then, can we help women to fulfil their desire to have children? Firstly, equal pay for equal work! That is the only way both parents will have an equal say when they decide who takes parental leave after the birth of a child. Secondly, both parents are equally responsible for bringing up their children. We need fathers' help. Without the support of the father of my four children, it would be impossible for me to work here. Thirdly, employers must facilitate parental leave for their employees, with support from the state if necessary. A country that wants children must put children at the centre of its policymaking. Fourthly, we need high-quality childcare and a child-friendly environment, no matter what the parents' income. Anyone who does not agree does not deserve to hear the laughter of children. President Thank you very much. May I also thank you on behalf of all fathers for that speech. We shall continue the discussion, and in this section the discussion will be opened on behalf of the political groups by Mr Fatuzzo, on behalf of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats. Three minutes, if you would be so kind. Carlo Fatuzzo Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to speak on this occasion, first to compliment the chairman of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Jan Andersson, for presenting this own-initiative report by the committee, so brilliantly and vehemently written by Mrs Castex in a series of consultations, with the participation of all the members of the committee - some in a particular way - and after nine years as an MEP, I would also like to say: at last we have a report in Parliament that talks about pensioners and the elderly! Indeed, it mentions them a great deal. Tomorrow morning, in my explanation of vote, I will tell you how many times the words pensioner and elderly appear in this report. It also talks about other things, of course, about the birth rate, about children and about skills training, but I want to highlight this, Mr President: why are we finally talking about the elderly? I am convinced that this is because all the governments are very concerned because having so many elderly compared with so few workers means paying much more for pensions, paying much more for healthcare than in the past. Just look back 20 years, 10 years, 30 years, 50 years, nobody bothered to think that the elderly needed assistance, that the elderly needed support, that people with elderly parents needed more time off work than in the past. We are beginning to talk about pension schemes, and we are beginning to say there should be more children, and that mothers should be given more help. Did we need this cataclysm to happen, which was compared with climate change by someone who spoke before me? From bad things, Mr President, I believe good things come, because what I see in this report I approve of wholeheartedly. Finally Europe, in the person of the European Parliament, is showing us how really to be a State. I hope Member States follow this example. Jan Andersson on behalf of the PSE Group. - (SV) Mr President, Commissioner, I want to begin by thanking the rapporteur who has done tremendously good groundwork but also has managed the negotiations between the different political groups excellently. As someone said earlier, this is a big challenge. Not a threat, but a challenge for the European Union. I will try to keep to the three main areas that form the structure of the rapporteur's report. First of all, birth rate. We have too low birth rates in Europe and I share the view that this is due, to a large extent, to inadequate political decision-making. It relates to men and women today wanting to be, and being needed, on the labour market but, at the same time, wanting to become parents and have children. We must encourage this combination in the Member States so that parents, both men and women - and this is important to stress - can combine their working life and parenthood. It relates to compensation for parenthood based on the principle of loss of income, linked to working life, at a high level so that people can stay at home and not need to suffer financially. Secondly, we need to expand high-quality childcare. We have a long way to go. We have targets, but few Member States meet the targets for the expansion of childcare at present. Then it concerns older people on the labour market. It is a paradox that we enter working life later and leave it sooner. We must create conditions with various measures in relation to health and safety at work, the possibility of further training, and flexible solutions in the grey area between working life and retirement, in order to enable parents to remain in work. Lastly, migration. We need people who come from other parts of the world in our society in order to develop and maintain our welfare society. We must therefore create an integration policy where they are integrated into our society and are not excluded. We must assist that policy, as there is no conflict with our welfare society. On the contrary, it is a prerequisite for developing it. Elizabeth Lynne on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, this has been a difficult report. There has unfortunately been very little time to reach compromises or for real debate on some of the issues - hence the large number of amendments. However, I am pleased with many elements of what we do have, such as the need to tackle the issue of elder abuse. More needs to be done, urgently, to end the physical, financial, emotional and other forms of abuse regularly suffered by older people. The latest estimate puts the number of older people that have suffered abuse at over 10%, which is a staggering figure. That is why I welcome the Commission's intention to bring forward a communication on that issue. But we must do more. Member States must also work towards ensuring independence, free personal care, lifelong learning and freedom from discrimination at the workplace for all older people. That means, of course, fully implementing the 2000 Employment Directive and then building on it. We must work to put an end to employees being thrown onto the employment scrapheap, whether at 50, 55 or 65. An arbitrary age of statutory retirement must be abolished, whilst ensuring a statutory pension age, set at Member State level. There is a very clear difference between the two. Individuals then have a choice to stop work and take their pensions, or to continue working and either take their pension or defer it until they choose to stop working. Unfortunately, I was unable to achieve consensus on this, and therefore it is not in the report, but I believe Member States must be encouraged to look at this for the future. I have tabled a number of amendments on behalf of my group, which I hope other Members will see fit to support, but most of the issues covered by this report should remain within the competence of the Member States. There is, of course, still a great deal we can do in terms of exchange of best practice. Jan Tadeusz Masiel Mr President, as the rapporteur correctly observes, the demographic situation depends on natural population growth, average life span and migration flows. I would add a fourth consolidating element to this dynamic, in the form of interpersonal relations and the political will that influences them. Man is a particularly demanding and difficult animal, who does not just reproduce when the time is right, but must additionally have suitable and proper conditions for doing so. The 20th century, and especially the years following World War II, did not fill mankind with particular optimism and a desire for procreation. It was as if the world did not appear sufficiently interesting to man to prompt him to bring children into existence. Today the time has come, now that we have understood the causes of the pessimistic demographic picture of Europe's future, to begin putting the situation to rights. Immigration, as it appears from the report, is not an adequate solution to the problem. Above all, we need to create appealing conditions for Europeans that offer an incentive to quicken natural growth. I support all the solutions proposed in the report, and I would place an emphasis on two. Care such as we have never before provided should be lavished on the family, and especially on women, who not only devote their time to motherhood, but also look after ill and elderly family members. This work demands to be covered by a special occupational status linked to remuneration. Furthermore, each child must have a guaranteed place at a crèche and at pre-school following the mother's return to work. Finally, demography is a problem that is, among other things, political, and we are politicians; we are in a position to rectify this poor state of affairs. Ilda Figueiredo It is true that there are demographic changes in the population of EU Member States which it is important to take into account but, in the analysis made, it is not sufficient to say that there is a falling birth rate and the population is ageing. The analysis needs to be taken further, seeking the causes and indicating measures which do not jeopardise mankind's progress and all that civilization has achieved to date. Thus we must not compromise the advances attained through applying scientific progress in order to improve people's living conditions in terms of preventive medicine, better healthcare, nutrition and housing, reduced working hours, and support for mothers, fathers and children, which has resulted in constant and regular increases in life expectancy. The existence of public policies in fundamental social areas, in particular universally accessible public services, especially in the areas of health and education, has made a decisive contribution. The fact that workers' achievements as regards organisation and working time, improved health and safety conditions in the workplace and progress on work breaks and holidays, proper wages and secure jobs have been enshrined in law has also been very important. However, increasingly neoliberal policies, whose essential instruments are the Lisbon Strategy, the Stability Pact and the guidelines of the European Central Bank, have led to the liberalisation and privatisation of public services and an increase in precarious employment, which particularly affects women. The rise in the retirement age is making it even more difficult for young people to find employment with rights, and universal access to public services and proper housing has also become more difficult. These factors all tend to reduce the birth rate. That is why we need to change policy as a matter of urgency. That is why we need to replace the Lisbon Strategy with a European strategy for solidarity and sustainable development that opens new horizons for Europe, of decent jobs with rights, in particular for women and young people, reduced working hours with no reduction in pay, better salaries, an end to discrimination, particularly wage discrimination against women, greater economic and social cohesion, adequate protection, and public and universal social security, guaranteeing a better quality of life and greater social justice. Hence the urgency of creating more, better and affordable facilities for childcare and for the care of dependent persons and of making public pre-school education generally available free of charge, so as to promote good working conditions which make it possible to reconcile work and family life. This in turn requires stable employment and working hours, and respect for the social role of mothers and fathers. That is also why it is necessary to allocate greater budgetary resources to less developed countries and why all Member States urgently need to ratify and apply the UN Convention on family reunification for migrant workers. Kathy Sinnott on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - Mr President, this is a report on preparing for demographic change. Does this mean we are giving up and accepting the dire prediction in the 2005 Green Paper? When that paper came out we saw it as a challenge to change. Among other things, we wanted to find a way to enable women to have the number of children that women said they wanted. Are we now throwing in the towel? Our desire to raise birth rates is undermined by our policies. Our competitive strategy is based on increasing consumerism. Yet consumerism can be a deterrent to having children. In consumerism we are taught to be selfish. Look at the advertisements. Pamper yourself; have it all; buy. For most people, having children and a family is the opposite. It demand selflessness, sharing and putting others first. As we become consumers we increasingly ask, can we afford a child? And we weigh up the cost of a child against the cost of getting ahead or a social life or a car or a house or a vacation. The child often loses with the potential parents saying either 'no, thank you,' or 'not yet'. And of course we must tackle infertility. But with over four million abortions a year in Europe, we cannot really say that our falling birth rate is primarily about infertility. I asked my intern to read this report and she made an interesting comment. Where are the men? If we want to talk about gender equality and demography, we need to talk about both genders being equally and fully responsible for rearing children. For many valid reasons, we have had to emphasise the cause of women. But have we reached a point where we have sidelined men? Raising a child is an enormous task. Although we must give all the help we can to single mothers and their babies, the state is at best a poor substitute for a caring, supportive and, dare I say it, protective father. Many women do not want to undertake motherhood without an involved father. Security is important in motherhood but financial security is not the whole story. We must encourage an emotional environment that is conducive to having children. Our culture needs to encourage men to step up to the plate. More than anything, having children is about our closest relationships which is why more and more childcare - though useful in getting women into the workplace - will not help increase the birth rate. To rectify our demographic crisis we must restore the basic integrity of human relationships. We must foster trust, patience, fidelity and love. Only in this atmosphere can men and women feel happy and secure enough to start a family and with real support for this family and family life, we will see an increase in births, plus the revitalisation of Europe. Thomas Mann (DE) Mr President, the European Union is facing demographic change as never before. By 2030 we will be lacking more than 20 million people of employable age. Two employed people will have to pay for one pensioner. The good news is that people will live longer, and today's elderly people are healthier than previous generations. The bad news is that the younger generation is too few in number and this will have dramatic consequences for urban planning, the construction of dwellings, the education system and the way work is organised. We need a more family-friendly environment in our Member States, more childcare choices, more workplace daycare centres, better opportunities for combining family and work, greater participation by women in the working world, more part-time work for parents and a secure return to work after child raising. Above all, we need stable career development paths and sufficient income, because these make it easier for people to want to have children. We also need significantly greater investment in people, to improve general education and specialist training levels. Lifelong learning programmes should benefit not only young people but also older people, who will want to work for much longer and who can manage a solid workload and are highly skilled and highly motivated. We should not expect too much of Mrs Castex's own-initiative report. The legal status of social services of general interest remains controversial. We are against an EU-wide framework directive or binding regulations. Furthermore, company pensions that have been established on a voluntary basis should not be burdened with additional obligations, such as, for example, criteria relating to family policy. This is a question of social security, a question of taxes, and therefore a classic matter for the Member States. With these considerations and the amendments proposed by the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, the report has become more substantial. With this report, we can hold a discussion of the necessary breadth about the consequences of the dramatic demographic changes. Alejandro Cercas (ES) Mr President, Commissioner, thank you very much for attending this very interesting debate. I would also like to thank Mrs Castex for producing this report and for enabling us to go deeper in a discussion that is helping us a great deal. In a country such as mine - Spain - which is going through a demographic crisis that, if possible, is more serious than the average in the European Union, this type of communication from the Commission and this type of debate are very helpful, because this is a deep-rooted, structural problem rather than a short-term situation, and these things take the problem out of the national political debate and make it much broader, with greater capacity for analysis and response. Indeed, as the Commissioner said, we are facing a problem, but we also have an opportunity. The opportunity should materialise through tackling this problem, not only in its effects - that there are more elderly people in Europe, that Europe is ageing - but also in its causes. We need to prevent Europe from ageing, because we are not going to avoid having more elderly people: science and medicine have brought us to this point and progress will continue to be made. The problem, as other Members have said, is that we need birth policies, demographic policies and we need children in Europe, that is what we need. We need to work in all areas, but with the understanding that it is a serious and fine problem that we are going to pass on to future generations if we do not lay the foundations for solving it now. I am among those who believe that Europe's social model is not the problem, but on the contrary it could be the solution. The ageing of Europe and the low birth rate in Europe would be even more serious without our social system. Other societies such as, for example, China, where they are going to experience something very similar, are going to pay even more dearly than us for the lack of efficient, intelligent and rational social models. Because, in short, the problem is going to be that change is inevitable and we are going to have to change. Our social system can change its techniques without changing its values. I think that the fundamental issues are solidarity, reconciling family and work life (to give fresh opportunities for families to produce new generations) welcoming immigrants, not as a burden, not as something that is negative for our societies, but as a phenomenon which, if we are able to integrate it, is once again going to help us to tackle this problem. Finally, there needs to be a major discussion about the role of women in our society, a discussion that needs to be conducted, as always, in the light of solidarity. (Applause) Siiri Oviir (ET) Commissioner, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the average birth-rate in Europe today is 1.5, but this means that there is no population growth. The Member States have studied the situation and their inquiries show that on average people would like to have two or three children. It is clear that there is a mismatch between people's wishes and the reality. This is the 21st century and women long ago stopped being satisfied with the role of housewife and child-carer. They are educated, they want to work and have careers; the income they receive from work provides a better standard of living for their families. However, we must be able to influence the birth rate, and to establish a situation in which the number of children a family wants to have becomes a reality. Our families need a sense of security that the birth of a child will not shatter a career, in other words there needs to be a better balance between work and family life, for both mothers and fathers. Parents want to enjoy a sense of certainty that they can provide their children with a good education and with the skills to pursue their interests, with the material support of the State where necessary. Without this sense of security people will not have children. Immigration as a means of increasing population is a naive route to take. It is only a partial, short-term approach. We should pay more attention to innovation, not immigration. Time will not permit me to talk about all the factors but I should like to emphasise that the demographic situation depends greatly on a gamut of decisions and legal rules in fields ranging from labour and family law to environmental law and national security. In conclusion I would like to thank Mrs Castex for her important report which contains a great deal of female empathy. Ewa Tomaszewska (PL) Mr President, the draft resolution once more draws attention to the demographic threat facing Europe. Responsibility for the future of our continent, and for its social and economic development, demands that special attention be given to this issue. A birth rate of about 1.5 on average is too low. In order to guarantee a simple replacement of generations, this figure must exceed 2.15. Promotion of model families with a small number of children or none, conditions of family life that do not guarantee a decent and stable economic situation (as a result of the impact of unemployment and lowered employment standards, particularly as regards the duration of employment) and punishment of women for motherhood through pension systems have undoubtedly contributed to the threats that have arisen. The ageing of society, which stems to a significant extent from the otherwise positive phenomenon of longer human life, but also from the deteriorating ratio between the number of people who are gainfully employed and the number of pensioners, is causing major financial problems for pension systems. In this situation, action must be taken to bring about change. I am, however, going to dissent from the conviction to be found in the report that this problem will be resolved for us by migration movements. Studies carried out in Poland by the Institute for Market Economics indicate that the boost to population numbers achieved by this method will be barely 2-3%, in other words far too small. This method also gives rise to social problems, as can currently be seen in Denmark, France and Germany. Integration processes take a long time. I would like to draw your attention at this point to the report's suggestions regarding rights for the families of economic migrants. The amendments that I have proposed result from a lack of precision regarding whether this means family in the sense of the law of the emigrant's country of birth, or of the country that is accepting the emigrant. I am particularly concerned about potential polygamy and the legal and economic consequences arising therefrom in the case of social services being made available to these families. I would also like... (The President cut off the speaker.) Bernard Wojciechowski Mr President, the word 'integration' has been used 24 times in this report. The proposed integration of immigrants out of the national taxpayers' pocket has not taken into consideration one important aspect, namely religion and civilisation. Militant secularists of socialist origin avoid this subject, although the Muslim population is shooting up. By 2025, one in three people living in Western Europe may, or will, be Muslim. The Archbishop of Canterbury has recently suggested that Europe should adopt Sharia law, which the President and the establishment of this Parliament would probably call 'multiculturalism'. This brings a confused debate to the fore that has been developing over the ways and possibility of integrating and assimilating the new immigrants flooding into the continent. Does assimilation mean that immigrants should absorb and be absorbed into European civilisation, or does it mean that they should join the descendants of old European nations to create some sort of new European man? Or is the creation of a common civilisation either undesirable or impossible? Although Europe has always had its full share of varying cultures, it has also had a mainstream Christian culture or civilisation, so to speak, in which most of its people, whatever their identities, have shared. For almost 20 centuries, this civilisation has been the central and the lasting component of the European legacy. One has to ask: would Europe would be the Europe it is today if, in the seventh and eighth centuries, the ashes of ancient Rome had been conquered and settled not by Christian societies but by Muslim and any other? The simple answer is no. It would not be Europe. It would be Egypt or Libya. Fortunately, there are people who will not accept cultural rights as a cover for Sharia. Religion should be protected from the State - the European State, in particular. It is only Christianity that can integrate other religions into a shared European project, by acknowledging what secular ideologies cannot. I believe that Europe can do that and Europeans should recommit themselves to Christian culture and the traditions and values of liberty, equality, law and individual rights that, for over 20 centuries, have been embraced by Europeans of all nations and that have been the source of prosperity and moral leadership in the world. This report can integrate nobody and nothing. It is a symbol of dead men walking. It might create a continent of zombies, unaware of their national identities. José Albino Silva Peneda (PT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, increased life expectancy and a constantly falling birth rate will mean that the current European demographic dependency index will rise from the current 49% to 59% by 2025 and 77% by 2050. Thus the European Union is facing an unprecedented problem, since in the future European cities will have a very high proportion of old people and society will therefore be very different from what we have today. That trend will mean there will have to be profound changes in important aspects of public policies. In addition to social security, there will need to be changes in health and care services, tax policy, spatial planning, immigration, security, culture, tourism, leisure, and so on. Financing of pension schemes will also have to be rethought, so that it is no longer predominantly State-based, and even if it is, contributions will not come almost exclusively from wages. Given the far-reaching consequences of demographic change, it needs to be considered from the point of view of the public administration and the social fabric, requiring the mobilisation of all economic, cultural and social operators in a structured analysis and debate on the various options as regards the measures to be taken. Hence the value of this report. Once again we are facing an area where it is essential and urgent to step up social dialogue; indeed there is no other way to tackle this issue. I agree with the Commission's statement that boosting the birth rate, in view of the urgency and scale of the matter, will entail the setting of a long-term strategy. That is the only way we shall be able to take preventive action and, at the same time, help the European Union to seize the opportunities which fall within a policy to boost the birth rate. Harald Ettl (DE) Mr President, today, at this late hour, we are discussing a report that deals with Europe's demographic future, with the public virtually excluded. The rapporteur deserves the highest praise for this report because in it she has dealt with our existential societal, political and social questions. The result should make compulsory reading for all MEPs who hide behind the day-to-day pragmatics of politics and ignorance of reality. The report reveals how and where the chill of the economy and the rat race can be combated with social warmth. Predictions of the way things will develop are there too, to open our eyes and develop a political philosophy of an inclusive society. That relates to the ever-changing question of what constitutes a family, which needs to be revised, and the fact that in today's well-off society, having children is connected with the fear of poverty. In industrial firms - and this is par for the course - parental leave is denied by macho managers who have never had a social life. In addition, it is impossible to count the number of employment relationships and workplaces that make people wonder whether children are 'affordable'. The additional measures listed in the report are necessary in order to turn a demographic development into a 'win-win' situation. One thing is certain: the society of tomorrow will look different. Whether generational conflict will become a socio-political apocalypse and potentiate the possibility of conflict between rich and poor depends on the here and now, and whether politicians are prepared to think politically and work sociopolitically. This report is more than a bad weather forecast that we can put up with today because things might improve tomorrow. This report is a clear call to change and develop our society, and most particularly it is an opportunity to improve our personal understanding of society. My thanks to the rapporteur once again. Jean Marie Beaupuy (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, as Mr Ettl said, we are facing a great challenge. All our fellow citizens have now realised that the climate is a challenge. Few have realised that democracy is a challenge. However, having said that, where is the demographic problem in Europe located? In the towns, of course, since 80% of the population is concentrated in towns. What is the issue for citizens today living in towns, and for mayors, since I know other fellow Members, MEPs like me, are also the mayors or deputy mayors of their towns? Let me take two sets of examples. A set of economic examples on the one hand. Where towns either have to accommodate a large
{'language': 'en'}