Do we need the more or less of a social Europe between now and 2025? This is the main thrust of the question posed by the European Commission in its reflection document on the social dimension in the EU. It was published on 26 April and is the first of a series of papers to launch the debate on the future of the EU27.
Whilst awaiting the answers, the Commission has already been launching a range of concrete initiatives, including the “European Pillar of Social Rights” and targeted initiatives (see other article).
On 25 April, the European Broadcasting Union’s “Generation What” survey revealed that 53% of 18-34-year-olds interviewed do not have confidence in Europe but that 76% young Europeans asked wanted to remain in the EU.
In this context, the Commission is beginning to recognise the anxiety of European citizens regarding their future, before proposing to the different actors about what kind of social Europe they want. On this basis, it is putting forward three different scenarios, including their positive and down sides: 1) a social dimension limited to free movement; 2) a social Europe à la carte and 3) an enhanced social dimension within the EU27.
The paper, however, only briefly mentioned the idea of maintaining the status quo or a more federalist Europe, dear to the heart of the President of the Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, which is, nonetheless, expected to be included in the March White Paper (EUROPE 11736).
Three scenarios scrutinised
As part of option 1, the Union would keep the rules in force that seek to promote the cross-border movement of persons but would not provide any minimum social standards. In other words, this would mean abrogating the current rules on maternity leave, working conditions, as well as health and workers’ security.
As part of option 2, several groups of countries would be able to decide whether to further integrate in the social field. They would therefore be able to launch, on the condition of being a minimum of nine member states, enhanced cooperations in the tax field, refugee integration, with, nonetheless, the risk of further increasing current fragmentation.
As part of option 3, the Union would no longer be content with just setting out minimum standards and would, in certain areas, entirely harmonise citizens’ rights. It could, for example, harmonise the retirement age or create new European agencies, such as the European work inspection agency or a European agency for transport
Similarly to Jean-Claude Junker at the end of March, during the presentation of the white paper on the future of the EU, the Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs, Marianne Thyssen, refused to be drawn on what were her preferences. She was, however, keen to emphasise that the solution would be through common action. Whatever happens, the options will not have any binding or standardising character and could also be combined or amended, pointed out one expert.
Pierre Moscovici, the Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, asserted that, “The Commission is on the offensive on the social question. Recreating economic and social convergence is urgent if we are to find a permanent crisis exit strategy. This is the Commission’s priority over the next few months. The member states must go with the flow”.
Some observers interpreted the choice of date for presenting this initiative (between the two rounds of the French presidential election) as a symbol of European determination.
Encourage upward convergence
At the same time as this reflection, the Commission is committed to, “replacing, as it ought to do, the social priorities at the centre of Europe’s projects”, according to the terms used by Jean-Claude Juncker. Europe will use two instruments to this end: a “European Pillar of Social Rights” and a European scoreboard.
The former is the subject of a recommendation and a proposal for a proclamation to be approved by the Council and Parliament. This pillar reaffirms the rights already in force within international and Community legal acquis and it completes them by taking into account new labour market realities. It contains a total of 20 principles focusing on three themes: 1) equal opportunities and labour market access; 2) fair working conditions and 3) social protection and inclusion.
The pillar explains, for example, that, “work relations that lead to precarious working conditions must be avoided, particularly by banning abuses and atypical contracts”.
The social scoreboard will be used as part of the “European Semester” budgetary process for following the progress of member states in 12 action areas, including income, health and inequality.
What now?
These questions will be at the centre of the social summit for employment and equitable growth on 17 November in Gothenburg (Sweden), which will be attended by heads of state and government, as well as social partners and other major stakeholders.
The reflection document on the social dimension in the EU will be followed by other texts focusing respectively on mastering globalisation (mid-May), Economic and Monetary Union (end of May), the future of the Europe of Defence (beginning of June) and the future of EU finances (end of June). Commissioner Thyssen stated during the press conference that, "these different documents will also tackle the social questions”.
As part of her response, the rapporteur at the European Parliament on the “European Pillar of Social Rights”, Ms Maria Joao Rodrigues (S&D, Portugal), was delighted with the Commission initiative and said, “We need a pillar for all European citizens and proper financial means and legislative instruments for these (20) principles to have a real impact on people's lives”. She also called for then to set up a “Children’s guarantee” and a “Skills guarantee”.
Anne Sander (EPP, France) described the pillar as, “the beginning of a response to ‘social dumping’, which feeds Euroscepticism”. She then underlined the importance of the subsidiarity principle.
Accusing Mr Junker of not keeping his promise to provide the EU with a “triple social A”, the co-president of the Greens/EFA, Philippe Lamberts, from Belgium, said that Europe should prove its ability to provide genuinely shared prosperity if it wanted to win back the trust of its citizens. He deplored the fact that, “Instead of taking concrete measures for an adequate minimum income, access to social housing, gender equality or presenting a proposal on working conditions, as requested by the European Parliament in order to cover new forms of employment, it is only offering consultations”.
The reactions from social partners focused more on the proposals relating to parental leave. (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)