The commentaries that I dedicated to the Lisbon strategy last week, call for, in my mine, a brief synthesis, so that no one aspect is divorced from the overall view. Some temporary conclusions on the state of the Lisbon goals are now going to follow, while awaiting the decisive preparatory phase to the mid-term review, which will define the revision and re-launch of the strategy.
1. No overall stagnation. The negative judgement of the Kok report on the implementation of the Lisbon strategy should not create the impression of an overall negative phase of European construction. I am aware that some observers and even some of the main players of European history consider that we are experiencing a period of stagnation: I don't share this opinion. The period in which the Lisbon strategy stalled to a certain extent (it was launched in 2000), is nonetheless, the period in which Europe accomplished achievements such as the single currency, the new method for negotiating the treaties (I'm talking about the Convention which created the constitutional treaty), unification of the continent, the relaunch (or re-birth) of common security and defence policy, the foundations for the common area for freedom, security and justice (with its "The Hague Programme", which is more worthy of the dissipated attention it originally received).
2. The Lisbon strategy has progressed. Even in areas directly linked to Lisbon, obvious achievements have been made: reform of the instruments and mechanisms in competition policy, clarification of the stakes at play and adoption of the principles for services of general interest, definition of European networks with implementation of European financial instruments, reform and modernisation (ongoing) of the role of companies, definition of the European patent (blocked due to linguistic divergences), opening of the telecommunications market and (partially) energy and rail transport etc.
3. Compromise, divergences and combativity. The Kok report represents a compromise between different and sometimes contradictory trends and orientations. I have always referred to the final result and declarations of Wim Kok, who was president of a group of 13 people from the business, union and environmental communities. Certain sources have assessed the rather bitter battle waged between economic, social and environmental aspects of the strategy. Employers highlight competitiveness, liberalisation (of services in particular) and flexibility of the labour market, whereas the trade unionists made a step by step defence of social acquis and the services of general interest. Despite the compromise that was achieved, divergences will be inevitable, not only between social partners but also between political forces (the Socialists have appointed their new president of their Lisbon Network, Robert Goebbels, who has already demonstrated his combativity by way of the position he took with Poul Nyrup Rasmussen and Harlem Desir on behalf of the EP Socialist group: see our bulletin on 3 November p 10.
4. Recommendations and initiatives. In my comments I found it impossible to resume the totality of the recommendations in the Kok report. As well as those highlighted last week (in part, those not retained by Heads of government), I am able to cite the reduction in state aid (they should not exceed 1% of GDP), "selective immigration" taking into account the real needs of Europe, respect for the deadlines for liberalisation of the energy markets and harmonisation (tax rate) of corporation tax in a number of Member States etc.
Among the other contributions to the debate, I would like to highlight that of Chancellor Schröder, who prioritised the idea of European supervision of financial activities, and an idea that is worth pursuing. The decision made by the European Parliament to organise, in preparation for the Spring Summit, meetings between the EP, civil society and (excellent idea) of members of the national parliaments).
5. A welcome presidency. I would also say that included in the positive elements, is the fact that the Spring Summit will be chaired by Jean Claude Juncker (who is at the same time the president of Euro Group, which will be preparing the new stability pact application modalities). The prime minister of Luxembourg is simultaneously: a) the Head of government who knows European affairs and their not always clear meandering, best of all; b) the Head of government who denounced the dangers of galloping rhetoric and the effects of the inefficient announcements threatening the Lisbon strategy; c) the most lucid defender of the indispensable balance between the economic and social chapters of EU policy. In fact the ideal president.
(F.R.)