- Mr President, I begin by thanking all the Members of the European Parliament who have contributed to the debate today and, indeed, to all the Members of the Parliament for having once again made this very great effort to deliver an opinion in the second reading under very severe time constraints. I would like to thank you for having clearly understood the necessity of avoiding any actions that could incite difficulties or threaten the long-awaited adoption of this directive on transnational information and consultation of workers.

The draft recommendation from Mr Menrad and the Committee on Social Affairs constitutes a clear indication of the fact that the European Parliament shares the point of view of the Commission and, dare I say, also the view of the Council in that we have now reached a stage in this dossier where our essential goal should consist of adopting the proposed directive. I thank you all, and in particular Mr Menrad for having refrained from once again putting on the table a large number of amendments even though I know that there were many points where Members would have wished to see changes.

In fact, I gleaned from the contributions of all the Members that they feel that this is a balanced text, that it is practical and of course it is also a very flexible text. One week ago, Mr President, I had a very interesting and productive discussion with the members of the Committee on Social Affairs. I had the impression that we all agreed that the common position adopted by the Council on 18 July is a good text and it provides a consensual, workable and easily manageable simple legal framework for the development of mechanisms for trans-national information and consultation of workers throughout the European Union. Once again I should like to stress my satisfaction at seeing the great extent to which the common position has been influenced by the European Parliament.

No less than eleven significant amendments proposed by the European Parliament since 1991 were introduced in the text of the common position and most of them concern very major points of the proposal. The common approach from the Commission and the European Parliament allows us to concentrate now on a set of major political points of discussion included in the draft recommendation presented to the plenary session of the European Parliament. The Commission has seriously analysed the new amendments now proposed by the European Parliament seeking to ascertain whether or not those which the Commission would be able to accept could even now be submitted to the Council without threatening the final adoption of the directive.

As a result the Commission can accept and introduced in its re-examined proposal the following amendments: Nos 1 and 2 partly, i.e. reducing the secondary threshold from 150 to 100 employees. Amendment No 7, reducing the three years negotiating period before the application of the subsidiary requirements, although only to two years and not to one and a half years. Amendment No 8 limiting the effect of the so-called tendency clause. Amendment No 9 detailing the protective measures which safeguard the exercise of the employees' representative mandate and Amendment No 10 reducing to five years the period within which the Commission has to review the application procedures.

If adopted, these amendments will be submitted to the Council of Ministers and the Commission will support them, provided of course that their acceptance will not provide the final adoption of the directive. As I explained to you during the first reading, the Commission cannot accept the amendments regarding the arrangements for the constitution and operation of the representation structure. They are Amendments Nos 3, 4, 6 and 11. The Commission considers that there is no valid reason for introducing restrictive and compulsory rules on these issues into the text of the directive. As these matters should be dealt with by the Member States in accordance with their legal traditions and in accordance with their practices. Nevertheless, the Commission can accept the addition of a new "Whereas", stating the right of the Member States to provide for the representation of different groups of workers.

The Commission also finds it difficult to accept the amendments which seek to broaden the scope of the directive or extend to third countries. That is Amendments Nos 1 and 2 regarding the reduction from 1,000 to 500 employees and No 5 as this would go beyond the natural scope of the directive, the eleven Member States to which it is addressed and the biggest multinational companies operating in Europe. Finally, Amendment No 12 stating that the consultation meetings should take place before the decision is taken. This could not be accepted without serious risk to the effective operation of the directive.

I should like to finish by once more congratulating the rapportewur, Mr Menrad, for his excellent work and thanking you, Mr President, for the efficiency and rapidity with which you have handled this crucial and historic dossier. I regard this as a job of work well done after a long number of years and it was made possible by a level of cooperation that speaks well for success of this particular dossier but I believe it also speaks well for a new era of institutional solidarity that can lead to progress of social policy in a really meaningful way. I congratulate all concerned.