The Covid-19 health crisis highlights the shortcomings of the public health policies of the European Union Member States and in particular their lack of social investment, underlines Claire Dhéret, who heads the 'Social Europe and Well-being' programme at the European Policy Centre. The European Union, whose role is defined in the Treaty as one of support to the Member States, should also be more active in coordinating responses to this pandemic, she notes. (Interview by Sophie Petitjean)
Agence Europe: In an interview with the German press, the Commission President acknowledged that the danger of the coronavirus had been "underestimated" by policy-makers. Do you share this observation?
Claire Dhéret: Yes, I don't think we took this health crisis seriously enough early on. Lessons should have been learned from the Chinese experience as early as January. But at the time, we didn't think it would reach Europe. This has not been a subject of detailed discussion in the Health Council and has largely been left in the hands of the Member States. Today, however, we realise that, without European coordination, we are heading straight for the wall. Today, the European Commission is trying to catch up by launching a number of measures to address the immediate effects of the crisis and anticipate collateral damage, in areas as diverse as mobility, budget and economic policies.
What is the state of preparedness of Member States for Covid-19?
Differences in hospital care capacity from one country to another should be noted. There are considerable variations in terms of medical equipment, in the capacity of hospitals to accommodate patients, in the number of intensive care beds, and so on. The figures are very different from one country to another. We are talking about 28,000 beds in Germany compared to 7,000 beds in France and 5,000 intensive care beds in Italy. These are huge gaps and reflect very different capacities. This reflects differences with respect to social investment, in education, in health. We can see the repercussions of a lack of social investment in countries that have neglected or been forced to reduce public spending. (...) It would be difficult for the European Commission to come up with recommendations in this area in the framework of the 'European Semester'. At the time of the crisis [in 2008, editor's note], the Commission's position was to encourage or even force countries in financial difficulty to implement austerity programmes. It would therefore be a little inappropriate to tell these countries that they are ill-equipped to deal with the crisis. But it is clear that such measures will have to be discussed at European level in the future. Awareness of the importance of investment in public services and social investment is necessary.
What does it say about the European Union and health Europe in particular?
Today's crisis highlights a gap, a paradox between the will of Europeans, more than a majority of whom want extended competences at European level in the field of health, and something that is not being achieved in practice. Today we pay for our past failures. Once again, what is important to realise is that, essentially, health issues come first and foremost through the single market, as opposed to the production, the free movement of medical equipment. These health skills have been developed in some areas, but unevenly, for example in the protection of workers, where certain health guidelines have been put in place.
But several European tools currently exist, such as joint procurement procedures, the civil protection mechanism, the European medical corps. Are these mechanisms effective?
All of these instruments represent a certain potential. But we're definitely a step behind the coronavirus crisis. For example, this shipment of masks with regard to Italy and support with this strategic reserve (rescEU) should have arrived earlier in Italy. (...) Then there are extreme cases, such as those masks that were seized by the Czech authorities to serve their national population at the expense of the Italians. This reflects the discrepancy between a crisis that knows no borders and a revival of nationalism in some countries, which already existed before the crisis. The danger of crises is a resurgence of nationalism. This health crisis could have the harmful consequence of highlighting European shortcomings and lead to even greater national isolation.
The former Secretary General of the European Commission, Martin Selmayr, published a tweet in which he recalls that each health crisis led to the creation of a new structure: the Food Safety Agency after the mad cow crisis (1986), the Centre for Disease Prevention after SARS (2003), joint procurement after H1N1 (2009). What will it be this time?
We will have to learn all the lessons from this crisis. This includes the question of our industrial autonomy in certain strategic sectors, such as the pharmaceutical sector and the production of medical equipment.