If I were a teacher … (continued). I should like to continue with the fiction begun in this column on 6 June. If I were to explain to high school pupils about the significance of services of general interest, I would go back a long way. I would recall that, in our countries, all citizens have the right to benefit from services such as the postal services, rail transport, electricity, telephone, etc. - services of good quality at affordable prices. To this end, the States apply pricing equalisation. It costs the same to send a letter to an isolated mountain village as it does to sent it to the house right next door to the post office, although the real cost may be one hundred or one thousand times more. This criteria also applies to rail transport (standard price per km), to electricity (unitary price per kw), and so on. Even before generalised universal suffrage, before women had gained the right to vote, before the birth of the Socialist parties, our States had felt the need to give concrete substance to the principles of equality between citizens, national solidarity and territorial unity.
The debate on application of analogous criteria at European level has (I simplify) come up against four fundamental obstacles: a) the first, apparently semantic, in political reality, concerned the fact that the concept of "public services" did not exist in some Member States or in the languages of those States (where these terms covered social assistance); b) the second, of an economic kind, derived from the principle of "price reality" (whereby prices must as a general rule correspond to the real cost); c) the third obstacle was the dramatic ineffectiveness of the "public services" in some Member States; d) and the fourth resulted from the fact that the State monopolies that governed these services were sometimes used by political parties for their power games (or worse). There was matter there for some mistrust and reticence.
The battle surrounding the place held by these services in European political and economic order lasted decades. Little by little, their significance was understood and recognised, after the necessary explanations had been given. The name was changed. It was no longer a question of "public services" but of "services of general economic interest", because the name "public" seem to imply that the provider of such services should be the State, although it simply indicates that they are intended for the "public" and that all citizens must have access to them. From the European point of view, it does not matter whether the provider is a public or private company, on condition that "universal service" is guaranteed. Article 16 of the Amsterdam Treaty has introduced services of general interest in the Community legal order, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights cites the right of all citizens to enjoy access to quality services at an affordable price, whatever their socio-economic situation or their place of residence. Competition comes into play among providers. The Union institutions are defining arrangements for application of principles thus acquired. The European Council has set out guidelines, the Commission has published a Green Paper by opening a broad European debate, and the Parliament has appointed Philippe Herzog as rapporteur.
Instruments for understanding. Perhaps I have been too lengthy for my pupils? If that is so, it is because I really wanted to recall why the guarantee that all citizens should benefit from services of general economic interest under good conditions represents one of the pillars of the European model of society. Regulations are complex, traditions and mentalities differ from one member State to the next (one only has to look at the arguments for or against nuclear power in the energy sector …), the interests at stake are sometimes colossal, but the real stakes must never be forgotten. There is no shortage of instruments for understanding this: the Commission's Green Paper (resulting from long and laborious discussion), the work of the European Parliament (on Wednesday, the hearing organised by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs is held in Brussels), and the work of the Committee on Economic and Social Affairs, the contributions of ISUPE (initiative group for services of public utility in Europe, which has published an economic and legal dictionary of public services in Europe, the basic document prefaced by Karel Van Miert). And I would also like to mention the activity of "Confrontations Europe", an association which last week organised a round table under its president, Philippe Herzog, and which successfully combines the stances taken with objective presentation and clarification of issues.
The Green Paper opens a debate (the Commission has not yet given its stance for or against a "horizontal" European directive), the Parliament is preparing its position, the Court of Justice has still to clarify and complete its doctrine on the fundamental aspect of State aid (new rulings are expected after the partially contradictory judgements of the past), the Convention is to specify the content of the Constitution's articles in this respect; and, at the same time, market opening is moving forward, in a sometimes spectacular fashion. Many decisions have still to be made. Recalling the basic principles and the significance of services of general economic interest is perhaps not unhelpful for those taking the decisions. (F.R.)