Brussels, 17/03/2005 (Agence Europe) - President Borrell's initiative to bring MEPs and national MPs together on 16 and 17 March, in Brussels, to discuss rekindling of the Lisbon Strategy demonstrated the interest of EU25 parliaments to be involved in the implementation of the strategy in order to revive it, after the somewhat disappointing experience over the past five years since the first spring summit in March 2000, in Lisbon. It also allowed Jean-Claude Juncker to state what he expects of the European Council on 22 and 23 March (yesterday's EUROPE, p.7) and to speak on review of the services directive in the internal market (see below). It was on this theme that the national MPs questioned José Manuel Barroso after his remarks last Monday on maintaining the principle of country of origin even in a revised Bolkestein Directive (EUROPE of 15 March, p.9).
The strategy must be made visible and understandable, Josep Borrell, President of the European Parliament, said on Wednesday, noting that the date chosen for the meeting was not entirely “innocent” as “we felt an echo of our joint work could be useful” to the Heads of State and Government next week. Mr Borrell recalled that it was in the middle of the “internet explosion” that the 15 States had, in 2000, defined the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy and, in 2005, there are 25 States that are to undertake to revive these objectives in a very different and very difficult economic context. The Lisbon strategy, he told national MPs, “is a good laboratory for analysing the limits of subsidiarity. What is the most effective level for action? Is it regional, national or European? In the field of research, is not the European level the most appropriate? The United States has understood this as it is a federal power”. Lucien Wieler, President of the Luxembourg House of Representatives, felt that one of the main weaknesses of the Lisbon strategy was the “lack of motivation” on the part of its players. Our society, he deplored “is reticent about innovation”. He went on to warn that “too often, our economy functions in a corporatist relationship between superiors and subordinates”, which is not the case in the United States, Australia or Asia. "We are mistaken when we think that our methods are the best, as they are not”, he stressed.
“I invite you to join the growth and employment partnership”, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso told parliamentarians on Thursday, announcing that his Commission hopes to have “close contact with national parliaments, which are the holders of democratic legitimacy”. If the results of the Lisbon strategy are “this mitigated” after five years it is mainly because of the “deficit of dialogue with national parliaments and the European parliament”, José Manuel Barroso continued, saying he was “very impressed” by the ability of MEPs to achieve a “dynamic consensus” on the Lisbon strategy during their vote of 9 March despite their differences of opinion (see EUROPE of 10 March, pages 7 to 10, and EUROPE/Documents No2402, dated 16 March). According to the Commission's proposals for the European Council of 22 and 23 March, the European Parliament will, as before each spring summit, have to take a stance on the “integrated guidelines” which, in future, should cover not only the broad economic policy guidelines but also the guidelines for employment, Mr Barroso pointed out. When it comes to national parliaments, the Commission “hopes” that they will discuss the national programmes that the Member States should adopt in the context of “enhanced governance mechanisms” as suggested, Mr Barroso noted, telling Member State MPs that “the ball will soon be in your court”. On substance, Mr Barrosso warned: “We need a strong, generous Europe (…), able to defend the values of cohesion and solidarity, and which is threatened if we do not act now. We must act together, and fast, otherwise today's young generation may be the first to live less well than the generations before them”.
Barroso admits he did not expect criticism on the services directive and calls on new Member States not
to adopt “nationalistic positions” when they want to defend their interests
Mainly questioned by French representatives on the subject of the services directive, president Barroso exclaimed: “Frankly, I did not expect criticism but rather support for my Commission. The previous Commission had, I believe, unanimously adopted the famous Bolkestein directive with votes from all political families - Socialist, Christian-Democrat and Liberal (…) Now, the Commission states that it will be revised”. “I respect” the problems that France is experiencing due to the referendum on the Constitution, he said, adding that it is precisely by taking the French debate into account that the directive should be kept, with two concerns in mind: the services of general interest and application of the principle of country of origin. Commissioner McCreevy will work with Parliament to look at the necessary adjustments to be made, he promised.
Speaking of the European Constitution, he was keen to point out that it is “of course, far more social than the treaties of Maastricht and Nice, or the Treaty of Rome (…). We must not give way to pressure from Europhobes seeking a pretext to reject it”. Asking whether one can truly “speak of social dumping in an integrated market”, Mr Barroso called on the new Member States, saying: “When you defend your interests, do not do so by taking nationalistic stances but do so from a European standpoint”. Mr Barroso, who will be in Poland on Friday to address a business forum, told the parliamentarians of these countries that their dynamism as well as their support was needed. The chairman of the French Senate's economic committee, Jean-Paul Emorine, said he did not understand Mr Barroso's remarks on the principle of country of origin, pointing to the “sensitive context in France” with the referendum on the Constitution. He spoke with insistence on “social harmonisation and worker protection and the European cultural model”. MEP Harlem Désir (French Socialist) called for a framework directive on services of general economic interest. A Polish parliamentarian exclaimed that Ireland did in the past what some new Member States are doing now, that is, lowering corporate taxes, and that is not tantamount to social dumping. Perhaps the “European model is too expensive and some social contributions of rich countries should be reviewed” he added. Another Polish parliamentarian expressed astonishment at the fact that it had taken five years for review of the Lisbon strategy, and said one should not wait three years for a further verification but rather set a date in two years' time.
Discussion with Jean-Paul Juncker shows services directive causes tension between old and new Member States - He defends European social model
On Wednesday evening, national MPs almost exclusively questioned Jean-Claude Juncker on the liberalisation of the services market. Stances taken confirmed the different approaches adopted by the old and new member parliaments, taking all political leanings together. During his speech, Mr Juncker had recalled that he supported liberalisation of the services market but not at any cost, especially if the proposal entails a risk of social dumping. While many representatives expressed similar views, Czechs and Polish in particular spoke of their “disappointment” about possibly restricting the free movement of workers. This is a “sizeable” problem for a sector that accounts for 70% of the European economy, Lubomir Zaoralek, President of the Czech House of Representatives, stressed to applause. In response to questions on the difference between competitive ability and social dumping, Mr Juncker answered that it was a question of determining the limit between “market economy and social market economy” - to a fresh round of applause. In his view, there is no point in fighting with “war cries” but one should pursue parliamentary work on “all details” of the text as the “devil is in the detail”. Speaking to a Lithuanian deputy, he objected saying: “When I say social you think fiscal (…). I agree that tax policies are above all national before being European (…) but I do not agree that under the cover of market opening one should seek to reduce workers' rights without saying so”. He went on to conclude: “ It is inconceivable for an unhampered and unlimited neo-Liberal wave to reduce to nothing an edifice that has been standing for several decades”. French Senator Jean Bizet went back to the codecision procedure to examine the text from every angle and the principle of country of origin but added that one should not miss unification of the services market.
On the Lisbon strategy, the representatives of the national parliaments generally subscribed to the Commission's proposals (national action plans, one person per Member State responsible for follow-up to the Lisbon strategy), as well as the European Parliament's resolution of 9 March. Elisabeth Arnold, Chair of the Committee on European Affairs at the Danish Folketing, said it is important to have “new mechanisms to accompany the strategy and a bigger role for the national action plans”. The Scandinavian model was cited as an example by several national parliamentarians, including several who are not from Scandinavia. It could be a “basis for inspiration for the new Lisbon strategy”, Sotiris Hatzidakis, Vice-President of the Greek Vouli ton Ellinon, said. Jan Jacob van Dijk of the Dutch House of Representatives, does not see a “contradiction between the various dimensions of the strategy” that must allow jobs to be created by developing economic growth in a sustainable perspective. Lord Grenfel of Britain regretted that it is not possible to significantly reduce the number of objectives. Andrius Kubilius, a member of the Lithuanian parliament, said the time had come to “know whether the EU sticks to agriculture or whether it moves onto an economy based on knowledge”.
National parliaments will have tough task of making European citizens understand need for sacrifices and reforms to revive Lisbon Agenda, Lucien Weiler says
“We are very pleased with the results of this meeting between 125 parliamentarians of the 25 Member States plus three candidate states and MEPs”, President Borrell told the press after work. He went on to say that they appreciated the frank interventions by the Commission and Council and have seen where their differences lie. Now, he said, they must continue to work together and communicate. The Parliament president felt, moreover, that “the Bolkestein Directive on services will probably be a landmark” in the role of the Parliament. “One might ask why it is only now that we turn to the national parliaments. What matters is the parliamentary dimension of the Lisbon strategy”, Lucien Weiler, President of the Luxembourg Parliament, said on the same occasion, believing that national parliaments should be given back their rightful role of intensive dialogue with citizens. Recalling the words pronounced by Wim Kok, president of the high level group on mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy, who said that “reforms that mean high cost for some will bring benefits for others”, Mr Weiler said that it was up to the national parliaments to find “the right balance”. He welcomed the proposal put by the chairman of the conference of EP parliamentary committees, Joseph Daul (EPP-Ed, France), to renew this kind of meeting between the European Parliament and the national parliaments before each European spring summit to “see how the Lisbon strategy is progressing”. Lucien Weiler believes the national governments and parliaments now have an “essential role to play in making European citizens understand what the Lisbon strategy means, and that they must make sacrifices and accept reforms”. The president of the Luxembourg parliament also called on national parliaments and governments to work in close collaboration with employers and with social partners in general.