Move to agreement on principles. Further encouragement for the revision and relaunch of the Lisbon strategy. This affirmation of course only involves the principles, because the Summit of 22-23 March will only be able to improve and simplify the strategy and amend the procedures. Tthe effective application will be what counts. However, it is already significant that a consensus is in the making with regard to what the Heads of Government will be saying, given the variety of different views. It has not been forgotten how the European Commission's first preliminary draft caused such distrust and perplexitie, to the point of provoking a warning from the president of the European Council, Jean-Claude Juncker (see this section 29 January) and that the Commission delayed the presentation of its document by a week. The first reaction from a large part of the European Parliament was very critical and several Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and environmental bodies voiced similar concerns. The Commission then presented its complementary documents on the environmental chapter (sustainable development strategy, fight against climate change) and the social chapter (new European social agenda), and in a lively press conference, President José Manuel Barroso asserted the firm determination of the Commission to respect the three chapters - economic, social and ecology (see our bulletin 10 February pp 6, 7, 8). The road ahead to a compromise was now clear. Certainly some parts of the European Parliament and certain NGOs still have reservations, some of them very strong. But the Commission did not reproduce UNICE (employers) or Eurochambres' agenda, according to which competitiveness should represent “the priority of priorities” because indicators show that the EU is in a bad position in all world categories on competitiveness, although it is in first place in all the other areas regarding social protection and environmental protection: Europe has to improve its competitive position but at the same time remain in the avant-guard in environmental matters and safeguard, with the necessary reforms, the “European social model”. Certainly, when we move on from the principles to measures of application, many divergences persist.
Very clear majority at European Parliament. But we're still not there yet. For the moment, the objective is to update the orientation texts for submitting to the European Council. Among the elements justifying optimism, I will mention, in first place, the agreement from the three main political groups (EPP, Socialists and Liberals) on the common resolution, which had not been possible for quite a long time. The Socialists had received the approval of some of their amendments and their president Martin Schulz noted the “very positive” tones emanating from the Commission (president Barroso and vice president Verheugen intervened in the debate: EUROPE 10 March p 7). Support would have been even wider if the Greens had not decided to vote against because they had not obtained the withdrawal of the Bolkestein directive. If there is anything certain in Europe today, it is that this unfortunate directive will never be approved in the form that Frits Bolkestein had devised it: whether it is withdrawn replaced by a new draft, or radically amended does not change matters. Whatever happens, the EP has its position, supported by the centre right and centre left. “United Left” has kept to its negative position, which is no surprise; one of Francis Wurtz's arguments does deserve some attention, which I'll be doing tomorrow.
Progress at the Council. The second essential element is represented by the positive results at the “sectoral” councils preparing the Summit. The Competitive Council agreed on the fundamental principles, such as reinforcing the industrial base of Europe, completion of the internal market, infrastructure development, improving governance. The Environment Council even went further than what the cautious Commission had proposed, by reaching an agreement on the new objectives for reducing future greenhouse gas emissions. In the two cases, debates were difficult but the results were more than had been expected and the European Council is not expected to backtrack. The “Social” Council has called for the implementation of the Social Agenda and has indicated some priorities.
The third factor to illustrate: Nicolas Schmit (very efficient in the name of the presidency, Council or when addressing the European Parliament) on several occasions highlighted the link between revision of the Lisbon strategy, reform of the Stability Pact and definition of the financial perspectives for 2007-13. The Lisbon strategy will just be hot air if an updated instrument for governance and the indispensable financial means are lacking.
(F.R.)