Strasbourg, 15/02/2001 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament, after having heard, on Wednesday in plenary, the Swedish Presidency and European Commission over the European Council on 23 and 24 March in Stockholm (see below), in the end did not manage to adopt a majority position over the follow-up to the Lisbon process. In fact, the plenary, after having voted on several amendments, finally rejected, by 199 yes, 219 no and 31 abstentions, the resolution by the German Social Democrat Hans Udo Bullmann on the "Spring 2001 European Council: the Lisbon process - the path to follow", over which there was a significantly polarisation between left and right (see summary of report in EUROPE of 12/13 February, p.15). The rapporteur regretted that the European Parliament, after having called for additional powers, finds itself due to this without a position over the Stockholm summit.
On the other hand, the plenary adopted (here too in a close majority, by 216 yes, 190 no, and 23 abstentions) the report on "the impact of the liberalisation and the economic reform process on the economic growth of the European Union" presented by Carles-Alfred Gasoliba i Bohm, Spanish member of the Liberal group, and discussed during the joint debate on the Stockholm Summit. By adopting the report, the Parliament asserts in particular that the countries where one can note the greatest deregulation and the greatest flexibility in the labour market are those which have seen the greatest falls in unemployment and an above average growth, and calls for the elimination of barriers to the development of synergies between companies, training centres, schools, universities and research centres, as well as for a greater role by companies in terms of work training and apprenticeship. Moreover, the EP insists on the continuation of the liberalisation process in the gas, electricity, postal services and financial sectors, as well as in transport, including by rail (while guaranteeing the present level of security) and the introduction of labour market reforms allowing to promote mobility and increase the attractiveness for the unemployed of job offer acceptance.
During the debate, Hans Udo Bullmann emphasised social cohesion and the fight for full employment, and spoke in favour of the setting out of ambitious aims in Stockholm; to those who assert that it is difficult to achieve concrete aims, he replied by recalling the path that the Union had managed to follow after having set itself the aim of economic and monetary union. The Lisbon process, which will continue in Stockholm, is a global process, underlined the Commissioner responsible for Economic and Financial Affairs Pedro Solbes Mira, who illustrated the main elements of the European Commission's summary report for the attention of the European Council at the end of March (see EUROPE of 8 February, p.6) over the press conference by President Prodi). For his part, the President of the Council Lars Danielsson indicated that the Presidency shares the priority that Mr Bullmann gives to employment, and hoped that the Stockholm summit manages to adopt intermediary aims in this matter (let us recall that the Lisbon European Council had set full employment as its target for 2010). We do not want to sweeten the Lisbon process, asserted Mr Danielsson who insisted in particular for the respect of the undertakings made. In Stockholm, the Presidency hopes, in particular, to establish timetables for the liberalisation of gas and electricity markets (as does the European Commission: Ed.), said the Swedish Secretary of State, who also cited among the priorities of the Lamfalussy report on integrated financial markets (see other pages of this bulletin), information society, the new technologies (including their ethical dimension), measures aiming to take into account the demographic ageing. As for Mr Gasoliba i Bohm, he in analysing the impact of the liberalisation and the economic reforms, also recognised the priority of employment, which notably passes by, he said, the reform of the labour market, the improvement of work training and the promotion of mobility. The Belgian Liberal Daniel Ducarme raised for his part the need for "universal services", but also the opportunity to "rethink and rearrange this concept", and to redefine universal services "in a new technological environment": in particular, Mr Ducarme felt that the State must "limit its participation in large companies" and that universal services must "better use the new technologies and ensure for the greatest number, and in particular to less favoured citizens, a quality service".