Solidarity, the essential concept. Jacques Delors does not approve of the “embittered of Europe” who, for example, oppose the Constitution because it does not correspond entirely to their expectations (see this column of yesterday), but this does not mean that he is inclined to accept just anything. There are compromises which are accepted to avoid impasses, but there are unacceptable things which, if allowed, would disfigure Europe. The example he emphasised during his sojourn in Brussels last week was economic and social cohesion. This concept, introduced among the objectives of Europe by a Summit vote (“to the disgust of the lawyers”), implies solidarity above all things. Solidarity is one of the basic principles without which the Union would not be what it is today. The former President of the Commission is very firm on this point: solidarity is not encapsulated by a transfer of resources from the richest countries to the less favoured ones; the EU is not a bank. Jacques Delors wrote in his Memoirs that “structural policies represent the essential counterpart to the single market, economic and social cohesion is one of the pillars of European construction”. His view on this has not changed.
Structural policies are essential, particularly in making the importance and significance of Europe comprehensible to every citizen at regional and local level. It is on the ground, seeing a certain project being realised right in front of them with support from Community funding that citizens see Europe in action. It is from that standpoint that the pluri-annual “financial perspectives” take on all their significance. It is not only a question of money, but also of image, of comprehension. Europe must be visible. It has ever increasing impact on the lives of everyone, but because of a lack of explanations and transparency, “it worries more than it reassures, it bores more than it fascinates”. On the new financial perspectives 2007-2013, the heads of state and government must find the courage and the stature of their predecessors who, as true statesmen, were able to approve the earlier budgetary packages, taking risks even as far as sometimes defying public opinion.
Institutional responsibilities. The second thing which Jacques Delors emphasised tirelessly was the “Community method”. If the institutional triangle Parliament-Council- Commission takes on its responsibilities, Europe can progress, gain transparency, find the paths of democratic responsibility and make itself understood by its citizens. If the triangle gets bogged down, if the Commission does not have all of its rights and duties recognised, if the “General Affairs” Council does not resume its arbitration and synthesis role, if the Summits are not appropriately prepared by submitting a limited number of points to the heads of state and government in documents of two pages (instead of hundreds of pages which they do not read), the European Council will be moving further away from its mission of deciding the broad guidelines for Europe and will be trying to do everything. As for the European Parliament, it should ensure that it maintains its positive approach to European construction: when 80% of a political group are in favour of a Commission idea or a draft resolution, they should not vote against it on account of the 20% who do not agree.
The Member States must understand that there is no point in reproaching Europe for failing to do what they should be doing themselves. It is not the mythical “social Europe” which will be able to redress the social security deficit in one country or resolve pension problems in another. Some Member States, such as Sweden, Denmark and to some extent the UK, have done what needed to be done while still maintaining their social-democratic ethos; they have proved that it is possible. Some national political parties who make a lot of noise cannot claim to be able to impose their policies on Europe when they cannot even make them acceptable at home.
Some other points. Anything else? Here are a few choice points made in passing: a) Jacques Delors does not believe that Germany is on the path to decline; the reforms undertaken and export results indicate the contrary; b) the Economic and Monetary Union does not automatically lead to political Union. These are two separate processes; c) Jacques Delors considers that Summit follow-ups to the famous white paper of 1993 to be a failure, even though its importance has been widely recognised and even today the document is cited as a guiding light for the development of some aspects of the Union (it launched the trans-European networks and proposed that they be part-financed by European borrowing). “The heads of government did not really want it, we have wasted seven years”, he now says.
(F.R.)