Madrid, 28/01/2013 (Agence Europe) - There are inconsistencies in the European Union's response to the crisis, says Bernadette Ségol, the general secretary general of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), in an interview with EUROPE on Sunday 27 January - the day before the 40th anniversary of the ETUC. Austerity - the impact of which has been underestimated - remains the major component of the European strategy, and investment - which could bring employment - is faltering. The initiatives that have been launched do not go far enough and, ten days away from the European summit on the multiannual financial framework (MFF), Ségol is concerned about a possible abolition of social funding tools, like the globalisation fund.
Agence Europe (AE) - Is there any significance to celebrating 40 years of the ETUC in Spain?
Bernadette Ségol (BS) - We chose Spain because it's one of the countries that is going through a very serious time of crisis, where austerity measures have affected the population and the most modest workers very hard. This is a way for us to show our solidarity - not only with the Spanish but with all workers suffering from these measures.
(AE) With a Spanish unemployment rate higher than predicted and the recent about-turn of the IMF, everyone seems to have underestimated the consequences of the austerity measures. Does this surprise you?
(BS) No, not at all. We have said for a long time that the consequences were going to be very serious. The Commission completely underestimated the recessive character of these measures but, unlike the IMF, it is not backtracking. We have always said it was necessary to do less and for longer in order to come back to balanced accounts. I think that the Commission is going the wrong way by persisting. It is contradictory to say that, at the same time, it wants to preserve the European social model and to continue implementing this economic governance.
(AE) Is the approach being taken to fight against the crisis adequate and consistent?
(BS) We want to say to Commissioner Rehn (in charge of the euro) that he cannot say that this crisis is behind us - when the level of unemployment has never been as high. We are shocked when we hear him say this. We want to see if he realises what the reality is and how he could listen.
(AE) According to the IMF, growth will return a little everywhere in the world in 2013, except in the eurozone where unemployment will continue to grow despite a slight recovery in 2014. What measures should be adopted today and in the future to create employment?
(BS) The first thing to do is to stop imposing these austerity measures which clearly have a recessive function. To create employment at the moment, the only solution is large scale investment to boost the economy. There is certainly a lack of political resolve for this at the moment. The Commission needs to ask the states to take measures on fiscal issues and on taxing high salaries. Why are we not doing anything about this?
(AE) Do you think that the European Investment Bank (EIB) is playing its role?
(BS) I think that it could be improved. The EIB's capital has been increased as planned in the pact for growth, but I still don't know what projects have been implemented. Ten billion more in EIB capital, divided by all the needs that Europe has, is not going to punch much weight. We were able to find hundred of billions very quickly to save the banks. Why can't we find this money to save jobs? Workers don't understand it.
(AE) The Commission has highlighted a split that is linked to the difference between the unemployment rate in the South and the North of the eurozone. How do you explain this split?
(BS) I'm not sure that this split exists. What the EU is doing is to create an area of social dumping in the South where the rules are less strong and this will create a negative draught on the other countries.
(AE) Do some states have labour markets that are too strict and that penalise growth?
(BS) This is an ideological position. It's possible that, in some cases, change needs to be negotiated. But to say that making the labour market flexible will increase jobs - this has never been proved. We have shown that there was a honeymoon effect but not a long term effect.
(AE) Have the European Commission's employment package and measures to fight against youth unemployment been welcomed by the unions?
(BS) There are interesting things in the employment package but few things that are obligatory and funded. The good intentions are welcomed but words are not enough. Without investment and financial support, there is no growth or employment. This issue is linked to the multiannual financial framework. Can we seriously say that we are going to boost employment if we cut the social cohesion funds that would be able to help this job creation? So we are fighting very hard for this MFF not to be reduced and especially not the cohesion funds.
(AE) Can a youth guarantee mechanism be put in place in all member states?
(BS) We are calling for this mechanism to be obligatory. We need to do all we can for this to be done because young people are the most affected by unemployment. They need to be able to see that the EU is able to do something for them. A positive message needs to be sent.
(AE) How do you feel about the planned disappearance of the Globalisation Adjustment Fund?
(BS) There is always a difference between what we say and what we do. If we no longer have this fund for trying to help workers in difficulty rebuild their career, we can't pretend that we are going to do this - it's contradictory. I hope this fund will be saved.
(AE) The ETUC demands a “strong social project” for the EU which would encroach on competences that are currently national. Do the MFF negotiations not show a resistance for an EU that is ever more political - indeed ever more federal?
(BS) Of course there is resistance. You only have to look at British Prime Minister Cameron who wants to repatriate all the social competences. But we are convinced that workers do not want a Europe that is only a free trade area. We need a social framework. And we need to explain this and to speak about the social elements that have been beneficial over the previous decades - the health directive or safety at work directive, or the negotiations on part-time working and parental leave. There have been positive developments. Losing that would mean losing a lot at the national level.
(AE) In December, the EU27 opted for a social section to be integrated into the roadmap on strengthening EMU. What should be in this?
(BS) We are pleased that finally people are realising that a social dimension is needed. Unfortunately, this social dimension seems to be caught up in economic governance as it stands at present. The ETUC is working on a structured and in-depth response so that our point of view can be taken into account before the roadmap is written. I am confident we will be in a position to make proposals in March.
(AE) Should this “strong social project” be developed at EU level or eurozone level? Should it be written into the budgetary process of the European semester?
(BS) Our position is clear. We want a social union for all the countries in the EU. Why not ask the states to set calculated objectives for youth employment and objectives on the dialogue. Including these arrangements on the European semester agenda would be a very tangible means of implementing social Europe. (EL with JK/transl.fl)