On Thursday 20 June in Luxembourg, Sweden and Austria confirmed that they were not in a position to join the ‘La Hulpe Declaration’ on the future of the European Pillar of Social Rights adopted in the Belgian city last April (see EUROPE 13392/19).
Belgian Social Affairs Minister Frank Vandenbroucke summed up by saying that the EU Council had been unable to “adopt this Declaration as a whole”, as consensus was required. “But the message has got through; the Pillar of Social Rights will remain our compass”, he said during a public debate.
“We have reconfirmed the importance of this message” and a “vast majority” of countries support it, he reiterated at the press conference.
For the European Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, Nicolas Schmit, this is nonetheless “an acquis to be passed on to the next Commission”.
Unsurprisingly, Sweden reiterated its position that the Declaration should not be one of the EU’s future priorities, unlike competitiveness and innovation, which should be given their rightful place in the EU’s future Strategic Agenda. “This Declaration does not have our support”, summarised Minister Johan Perhrson. Austria was also unable to “co-sign this declaration, as there was no agreement” within the government, commented the Deputy Permanent Representative, Franz Wirtenbergen.
For his part, the German Secretary of State, Rolf Schmachtenberg, highlighted “three very important themes” covered by the Declaration, including “democracy at work, involving employees in decision-making, facilitating entrepreneurial freedom and the appropriate use of artificial intelligence”.
Spain, too, affirmed its “full support” for the text and for the ‘Pillar of Social Rights’, which has made a difference to people’s lives, from the SURE programme during the Covid-19 pandemic, to the European Disability Card, the representation of women on boards of directors and the Platform Work Directive. “We need joint responses based on solidarity; it would be a mistake not to take up these challenges”, said Minister Pablo Bustinduy Amador.
‘Freedom to move versus freedom to stay’
In the afternoon, the ministers and their representatives also discussed the social dimension of the internal market, based on the recommendations of Enrico Letta’s report (see EUROPE 13432/23).
During this debate, Germany insisted in particular on a better policy for cross-border workers, a better housing policy and a real “mobility network” in the EU, with progress to be made on the regulation coordinating social security schemes.
For Luxembourg, the ‘freedom to stay’ advocated by the Italian to remedy regional imbalances in the EU is entirely legitimate, but freedom of movement and its contribution to the single market must also be preserved for businesses, which must be able to continue to provide cross-border services, which is also what makes Luxembourg special.
However, this country stresses that the internal market needs to be more inclusive, defining a level playing field with social investment. It recalls that competitiveness and the strengthening of social standards in the EU are “not mutually exclusive”, said Minister Martine Deprez.
For Italy, there is an urgent need to increase the single market and strengthen competitiveness in the EU, and that this doesn’t translate into a reduction in workers’ rights. The social component must be an integral part of the internal market.
‘Freedom to stay’, on the other hand, is “very important” for Rome, which wants to avoid a brain drain in the EU. It is also a question of recruiting workers from third countries and ensuring that migrant workers are more effectively integrated into our societies, said Stefano Verrecchia, the Deputy Permanent Representative.
For France, the objective of economic growth “must go hand in hand with inclusive and sustainable social policies” that respect workers’ rights and territorial cohesion.
Paris fully supports “the place given to social dialogue and collective bargaining”, which are essential keys, and also reiterates its desire for free movement that is not to the detriment of workers’ rights.
Paris is therefore calling for a fair agreement on Regulation 883, and on Thursday reiterated its opposition “to a single, digital form for the posting of workers, as proposed by the Commission” with a closed list of information. This will have repercussions on the policy for receiving posted workers and on the policy for combating fraud, said its representative, who also called for the e-declaration of posting to be dealt with in the ‘EPSCO’ formation and not in the internal market. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)