Activities of Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS related to 2015/2257(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Erasmus+ and other tools to foster mobility in vocational education and training (A8-0049/2016 - Ernest Maragall) ES
Amendments (4)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that Erasmus and other mobility programmes have fostered European integration and strengthened the idea of citizenship; notes that these programmes have had an indiwithin the European Union have contributed to the potential increase in the cultural universality of their beneficiaries, and have been an important mechanism for promoting tolerance, solidarity and dialogue between citizens of differecnt impact on employmentnationalities and experiences; points out that mobility in the context of vocational education and training (VET) is fundamental to the fight against unemployment,an important factor in increasing and diversifying technical and academic capacities, which enhances employability and reduces the skills gap;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, despite improvements tothe propaganda around the benefits of the Bologna Treaty and other processes for the standardisation of education and training systems, serious inconsistencies persist in the arrangements for the recognition of diplomas, credits, skills certificates, competency accreditations and acquired expertise in the context of VET, a legal basis applicable throughout the EU is needewhich fail to meet the expectations of students and workers who seek to make use of these arrangements of their own accord;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomesPoints out that the tools developed by the Commission, such as Ploteus and Eures, which offer information about VET and mobility, but deplores the fact that they are little known and little used; notes, however, that mobility cannot be understood as a solution to the problems of unemployment and should not be promoted as a policy in substitution of the responsibility of the Member States to invest in education, training and the creation of employment, ensuring that mobility is a personal choice and not a ‘survival solution’ for citizens;
Amendment 125 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for a revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) based on criteria included ing the prior assessment of the social effectiveness of measures to combat unemployment, with funding for the less effective provisions being cut, an approach which iensuring that the allocations made to these programmes particularly important at times of crisis such as the strengthened, encouraging the independence of beneficiaries and truly universal acceses, which are marked by unacceptable imbalanceslst at the same time avoiding the elitisation of mobility by means of under-financialisation.