Ambition remains. The Lisbon strategy was confirmed as the basis of the EU's economic policy for the decade that has just begun, it was even complete in some of its elements. It is normal that, in several commentaries, the emphasis was placed on certain divergences that remain, but the main results of the Summit, the confirmation of a strategy and its aim. That aim, we know, is extremely ambitious: create, by 2010, the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy in the world. What separates this aim from a slogan, is the scope, the number and the detailed nature of the actions undertaken or set as targets. These actions are already partly underway, and they have all been confirmed and sometimes detailed. At the same time, enhance the crucial characteristic of the Lisbon strategy, that is to say the close interweaving between economic and social, thus between the economic aims (competitively, efficiency, structural reforms) and solidarity, in order to confirm (or to re-establish there where it had deteriorated) the "European model society". This model must be adapted and modernised, but it well and truly exists, regardless of what certain economists say. In summary: divergences to be smoothed out, certain delays and a few failings must not make us forget that the EU 15 have maintained their heading: disproportionate aim of the Lisbon strategy, with the undertaking to return to full employment, remains the guiding line of the European action over the next years in the economic and social domain.
Courageous or foolhardy? Romano Prodi was courageous and at the same time foolish in setting figures, the eve of the Summit, the aim from one to six, plus the Galileo project. Foolhardy, because it then became easy to do the calculation of the number of objectives reached or missed, and to assess the success or failure of the session. No place for the woolly phrases susceptible of masking a possible failure, nor for the dialectic exercises of the kind used by those who had followed the Nice Summit. Also, effectively, in Stockholm the President, Goran Persson, was explicit in defining the result as "a half success". Part of the aims have been achieved, others not. What is missing, is easily said: an accelerated timetable for the total opening of the gas and electricity markets; the setting of the "2004 objective" for the completion of the single sky; a firm undertaking to approve the Community patent by the end of the year; the introduction of the balancing of pension systems between the Stability pacts criteria.
Opening of gas and electricity markets. The European Council confirmed, in an explicit manner, the aim of opening these market, which means that even France accepts it, and that is already pretty good. What is missing, is the date, which certain Member States would have wanted to be very soon, 2003 or 2004. Though over the two main demands one French, the other Spanish, there was an agreement.
The Summit conclusions assert, with regards to the "general interest services" as a whole, which must be guarantee universal services, safety as well as security and the continuity of supply. This is much more than a formula. It is the realisation that the EU 15 have progressed towards a common doctrine in a field where, a few years ago, there did not even exist a common understanding: the EU 15 cannot understand each other. Today France recognises that the opening of markets and competition represent the aim even in the sectors where national monopolies are part of the State conception, and at the same time, the Member States that have never known such a system admit that competition must be accompanied by precise guarantees in favour of the citizen, to whom the essential services such as electricity, water, transport, must be ensured on an equal footing. Mr Jospin once more cited the blackouts in California and the problems of railway safety in the United Kingdom examples of failings by the private sector against which Europe must be forewarned and he called, before setting a date for the total liberalisation, for the resolution of specific problems, such as the treatment of State aid (thus, public financing) in sectors that citizen equality is dependent upon. In the face of this situation, Mr Aznar called for and got a justified precaution: that the European Council indicate (in diplomatic talk, thus without citing companies, but in a clear manner) that Electricite de France (EDF) should not benefit from the opening of neighbouring markets, that is to say the markets of the countries that anticipate or will anticipate the liberalisation with regards to the obligatory deadlines, while the French market remains partially closed.
"Single sky". President Persson included this field among the successes of the Summit. In reality the phrase "conclusions" is too vague to correspond to the expectations of Romano Prodi, who wanted "decisions" and an agreement over Gibraltar. The text keeps itself to expressing the "intention" to create the European air space and the hope of progress by June. Intention and hope, are not a lot…
Community patent. The European Council spoke of its "concern" over the absence of progress and invites the Council and the Commission to "accelerate their works". This is honestly disappointing, if we consider the importance of this realisation to relaunch research and innovation in Europe: no date, no guidelines to resolve the four problems that block the regulation. Romano Prodi considers unreasonable the linguistic claims of Spain, as the multiplication of languages will render illusionary the aim of a patent that is cheap and simple to gain for companies. In his opinion, it is not a sector where national prestige and pride have their place. Languages, it is crucial, as the in essence they affect even the national and cultures, but for patents, technical field if there is one, where the English terminology is, either way, unavoidable.
Pensions. The need for a sufficient coverage by the pension systems, the requirement of their economic viability, are cited in the Summit conclusions, and this is already something. Though several Member States are still far from accepting that they be included among the obligations of the Stability Pact, which would make possible institutional pressure on the States that are slow in their reforms or which do not provide sufficient efficiency.
Many achievements make a red-letter day against four black spots (or grey). The four unresolved points are of great importance, but those who have read the above will have understood: this does not concern insurmountable divergences nor fundamental contradictions, but issues to be clarified, process that move forward without having ended. Over the principals and aims - open the energy markets, complete the European single sky, create the Community patent, reform the pension systems by making them viable - agreement exists. In the face of these four black-spots (or grey), how many elements albo signanda lapillo, to be marked with a red-letter.
The list is long and we can only send back to the Summit "conclusions", that EUROPE has sent as of Sunday to its subscribers, through the usual Special edition. Certain Heads of Government placed emphasis on the inclusion of biotechnology among the "cutting-edge technologies" to be developed, but with precise obligations: guarantee the health and safety of consumers, preserve the environment, the ethical principals. Others have cited the notion of "sustainable development", inserted - it was about time - into the Lisbon strategy with the undertaking to concretise it during the next Summit in Gothenburg. We could also add the intermediary figured aims for employment rates (previously, several Member States were opposed to any figured indication in these areas), the undertaking of a timetable on mobility of students and youths in training as well as on the new rules for public procurement (before the end of the year), and of course everything that concerns the integration of financial markets with the compromise on the Lamfalussy report. Another element that seems to have passed unawares, the "yes" from the Summit to the creation of the European Monitoring Centre for industrial mergers, which will tackle the problems of delocalisaton, and the confirmation that the Commission will present a Green Paper on the social responsibility of companies, in June
Galileo: worse could have been expected. What pleases me to underline above all, is paragraph 42 of the "conclusions", relating to the Galileo project, of course due to the meaning of the project, but especially due to the "political reservations" that have been raised by two Member States, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. However, we see no trace in the paragraph cited, which says on the contrary that "the European Council recalls that it is important to launch without delay the Galileo programme", which logically presupposes unanimity, all the more so that the following paragraph specify what the Summit expects from the Council. We could have feared, and certain commentators foresaw it, that the two countries cited would have maintained their reservations so as not to displease the United States, concerned with maintaining its monopoly; they did not do so! It only remains to await the confirmation of this constructive attitude, rapidly as the timetable is very tight, it is a question of weeks (see our bulletin of 23 March, p.7).
Another reason for satisfaction: on the sidelines of the Summit the Heads of State and Government signed with representatives from the world of football, the agreement on the new rules for the international transfer of football players. Thus, the specificity of sport, affirmed on several occasions by the Summits and included in the Treaty, has found a first realisation.
(F.R.)