Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Progress Report = Draft statements for the Council Minutes

Inhoud

Delen

enveloppe
  1. Tekst
  2. Originele weergave
  1. Meer informatie

1.

Tekst

COUNCIL OFBrussels, 20 June 2011 THE EUROPEAN UNION

11077/11 ADD 2 REV 1

Interinstitutional File: 2010/0380 (COD)

SOC 459 CODEC 970

ADDENDUM 2 REV 1 TO THE PROGRESS REPORT

from: Presidency

to: Council (EPSCO)

No. Cion prop.: 5063/11 SOC 7 CODEC 8

Subject: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004

  • - 
    Progress Report
  • = 
    Draft statements for the Council Minutes
  • 1. 
    Joint statement by Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Malta, the

Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

"Social security coordination as provided for by Regulation 883/2004 is important for

ensuring that the right to free movement of persons can be exercised effectively, in

accordance with the provisions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the

Functioning of the European Union. However, the structure, design and entitlement

conditions of social security systems are determined at national level, depending on national

circumstances and traditions, with due respect to the legislative framework set by European

law.

The free movement Directive 2004/38 lays down the conditions governing the exercise of the

right of free movement and residence within the territory of the Member States by Union

citizens and their family Members. It also sets out the limits placed on these rights on the

grounds of public policy, security or health.

Many of these limits have a particular relevance in the context of social security coordination.

These include inter alia that Union citizens who are not workers or self-employed according

to the criteria laid down by the Directive shall have a right to residence on the territory of

another Member State for a period of longer than three months, if they have sufficient

resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social

assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence, and have

comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State.

Recent discussions in the Administrative Commission have revealed different interpretations

at the European level on the interaction of the social security coordination Regulation

883/2004 with other relevant EU instruments, notably the free movement Directive 2004/38,

including with regard to the concept of residence.

Against this background, the concept of residence in the context of the interaction of the

social security coordination Regulation 883/2004 with other relevant EU instruments, notably

the free movement Directive 2004/38, should be further discussed.

We call on all Member States and the European Commission to continue to look into this

issue as a matter of priority, including in the Administrative Commission, with a view to

considering amendments to the current legislative framework, should these be deemed

necessary."

  • 2. 
    Statement by the Danish delegation.

"Denmark would like to underline the importance of free movement of workers within the

Union and Regulation (EU) 883/2004 ensuring the necessary coordination of the social

security schemes of the individual Member States as an element in the free movement of

persons.

Denmark finds that the present proposal is problematic and has during the entire negotiation

process made it clear that the proposal is far from a solely technical amendment of the

Regulation, but rather a very substantial one. The proposal contains central elements which in

the Danish view are very extensive. Denmark has therefore insisted on the proposal being

accompanied by an impact assessment. The two parts of the proposal that Denmark considers

problematic are:

Applicable legislation (Art. 13) which may impose on Denmark considerable additional

public expenses on social security. We do not oppose the purpose of the proposal on

simplification of regulations, but it has an uneven implication as regards the different social

security schemes.

Unemployment insurance schemes for self-employed frontier workers (Art. 65 a) which in our

opinion implies a violation of the basic principles of coordination of the Regulation. The

intention behind the proposal is that Member States with unemployment insurance schemes

for self-employed persons are to compensate for other countries choosing not to have this

insurance facility.

Denmark has proposed that substantial amendments should be based on impact assessments

of the proposal. We have therefore asked for more time to deal with the proposal.

Denmark is therefore grateful that a number of Member States have shown understanding for

the Danish approach and at the same time welcomes the fact that the Presidency has decided

that the proposal cannot at present be submitted for political adoption (general approach).

Denmark will play a constructive part in the clarification of the consequences of the proposal,

including the financial and legal ones, in order to ensure that the Council has sufficient basis

for adoption of a proposal."

  • 3. 
    Statement by the Irish delegation.

"Ireland would like to underline that social security coordination as provided in Regulation

883/2004, and the Implementing Regulation, is important for ensuring that the right to free

movement of persons can be exercised effectively, in accordance with the provisions of the

Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

The proposal in question contains a mixture of technical and substantive amendments. While

accepting the need to make progress on technical updating, Ireland is concerned that efforts

are being to make substantive changes too quickly and has therefore asked for more time to

deal with the proposal.

Ireland has consistently and clearly stated during the course of negotiations that this proposal

is a substantive one and not solely concerned with technical amendment of the Regulations.

Ireland has stressed the importance of such a proposal being accompanied by an impact

assessment, particularly in relation to the proposed changes to the rules on applicable

legislation. Ireland asks the Commission to examine the position of airline staff and their

employers, operating in the different sectors of the industry, in the context of their anticipated

Communication on Highly Mobile Workers.

Ireland welcomes the fact that the Presidency has decided that the proposal cannot at present

be submitted for political adoption (general approach).

Ireland will continue to play a constructive part in the development of the proposal,

particularly in assessing its impact on workers and employers, in order to ensure that the

Council has sufficient basis for adoption of a proposal."

_____________________

2.

Originele weergave

afbeelding document
 
 

3.

Meer informatie