Brussels, 21/09/2004 (Agence Europe) - In its adoption of the own-initiative opinion by Joorst van Iersel (former president of the Chamber of Commerce of the Netherlands) pleading in favour of "Better economic governance in the EU", the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) is underlining the need for a clear and credible institutional context to ensure that European commitments are followed through.
Introducing the opinion, "which focuses on a major issue, that of economic governance", to the plenary, the president of the "EMU, economic and social cohesion" section of the EESC Henri Malosse (director for European and international affairs of the assembly of French Chambers of Commerce and Industry) said that the absence of economic governance was a "fundamental shortcoming" in terms of progress in the Lisbon strategy objectives.
"The aim of this document is to show the links between economic development and the Union's decision-making capacities", added rapporteur Joorst van Iersel, who feels that "it is necessary to create an institutional framework capable of generating confidence". To do this, more transparency is needed, and the "overproduction of documents and opinions" which duplicate effort must be avoided, and "greater discipline is needed".
In a press release, the Committee indicated the need for: 1) a sharp distinction in analysis and objectives, between those that are reserved for the EU and those reserved for the Member States; 2) pursuing realistic objectives in order to guarantee credibility and avoid frustration; 3) conclude the Lisbon process, to boost competitiveness and structural adaptations; 4) dissuading the Member States from blaming "Brussels" for defining European objectives which they have agreed together.
More specifically, the EESC stresses that the "new version" of the Lisbon process which will soon be drawn up by the Commission should take up the method followed successfully for "EUROPE 2002". The only real progress made by the Lisbon Strategy concerns the internal market, at least in terms of rules and legislation. However, the implementation is regularly behind, continues the Committee in its press release, adding that "progress is a direct result of the Community method".