Strasbourg, 16/02/2001 (Agence Europe) - Where the European Commission and the EU Council right to criticise Ireland, by recommending for the first time that a Member State modify its budget so as to conform with the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines? (see EUROPE of 12/13 February, p.8). Do they not thus risk encouraging euroscepticism, a few months before the ratification of the Nice Treaty? These where the main question asked, Thursday evening, during the EP debate on the Irish and French Stability Plans.
The Socialists generally welcomed the Commission and Council decision, while sometimes regretting, as with the British Labour member, Proinsias de Rossa, the "arrogance" of the Irish Minister during last Monday's ECOFIN Council. "The problem is that the Member States adopt, together, the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, then do not take them into account when adopting their budget", noted the French Socialist, Pervenche Beres. The aim must be to avoid the dangers of overheating the economy and inflation, underlined the Swedish Social Democrat, Goran Farm. As for the CDU member, Karl von Wogan, the initiator of the debate, he welcomed the fact that the Council acted in favour of stability, but questioned the wisdom of starting with Ireland, "whose rate of growth make most States dream". "I hope that the Commission will have the same courage with the large States", he noted. While France does not respect its undertakings, the Commission chose to begin with Ireland, which has respecting most of the criteria, noted the Frenchman Jean-Luis Bourlanges (EPP), when feeling that, "when there is an insufficiency in Europe, it is the small who suffer". For the "unlisted" Frenchman Georges Berthu, the problem is to be sought in the rigidities of the EMU procedures, and this is just the beginning: "The Commission is practising to then harden the discipline in view of larger aims", he felt. The French Green Alain Lipietz, as with the French Communist Francis Wurtz, stigmatised the European "liberal" approach. The Commission reacts when Ireland reduces taxes on citizens, then it does nothing when Ireland practices dumping by reducing company taxes, noted Mr Lipiets. "We suffer the EU's liberal logic a few months before the introduction of the Euro", felt Mr Wurtz, in attacking the logic which is inferred by the recommendations that attack in priority public and social spending. While recalling that Ireland has accepted the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, the Irish Avril Doyle (EPP) and Proinsias de Rossa (ESP) wanted greater clemency, suggesting the an "opinion" from the Commission would have probably sufficed rather than a "recommendation". This sanction risks encouraging the Eurosceptics during the next Irish elections or the referendum on the Nice Treaty, feared the Irish MEPs, argument also put forward by the Swedes Goran Farm and Olle Schmidt.
Commissioner Pedro Solbes repeated that the Commission proposal and the Council recommendations "do not fall from the sky" and that the Council had already warned Ireland in 1998 of the need to adopt a more strict fiscal policy". The Commission worked to apply the rules "set in the Maastricht Treaty", assured Pedro Solbes, while recognising the pertinence of the question from Karl von Wogau, who questioned the EU's competence with regard to the States budgetary guidelines. "Stability and competition are part of the EU competence, but taxes and social security, training and education", concern the Member States", felt Mr von Wogau. "That there was spending on health is a good thing, but what concerns us, is the global budgetary situation", replied Mr Solbes adding that it was for the Irish Parliament to specify in which way the Irish 2001 budget could be tightened.