Brussels / London, 21/10/2005 (Agence Europe) - Just one week before the informal Hampton Court summit, the European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) of the European Parliament organised a public hearing on 19 and 20 October in London to reflect on how to protect the European Social Model (see EUROPE 9049). To this end, the Group heard experts, trade unionists and academics presenting their assessment of the British social experience in order to enhance the Left's reflection on the European Social Model. Francis Wurtz, GUE/NGL President, began by saying that, in the context of Europe's existential crisis, Tony Blair presented himself at the end of June as the champion of the European Social Model. He said Blair hoped to push forward his conception of the European Social Model at Hampton Court and that he considers the British social model is to be taken as a reference. During the discussions which mainly covered the ideology of the third “Blairist” way, adjustment to globalisation, poverty and the public-private partnership mechanisms (to which EUROPE shall return), the affair that opposes the Latvian company, “Laval un partneri”, to the Swedish trade union, “Bygnads”, in the services sector was also laid on the table (see EUROPE 9049). Next Tuesday, Commissioner Charlie McCreevy, whose comments had caused a strong emotional reaction among European Socialists, will explain himself before the European Parliament. We recall that the Latvian company had refused to apply the Swedish collective agreements on salaries for its Latvian employees posted to a renovation site in Vaxholm. The Latvian company initiated proceedings against the Swedish government at the EC Court of Justice for violation of European rules on the free movement of persons.
“McCreevy simply applied the single market rules and especially that on mutual recognition which is as diabolical as that of the country of origin. In substance, except for one small difference, this follows the same logic. More careful thought should be given to the matter. On Tuesday, before the EP, I shall cite Community texts and the caselaw of the EC Court of Justice, which state this although we have not yet seen the effect it has had”, Farncis Wurtz said firmly, adding that the PES Group considers McCreevy has been over-zealous in his liberalism. The debate at the EP, he continued, will be very enlightening on the texts. President Wurtz took a categorical stance in favour of rejecting the services directive even though, “the original principle is replaced by the neo-liberal principle of mutual recognition. The Liberal worm is in the fruit, and it is not substantial progress!”. Brian Denny, the spokesman for the British rail, maritime and transport trade union (RMT), noted that the conditions of salaries, employment, health and education, as well as other things, are regulated. He asserted that it would not come as a surprise to him if the European Court of Justice were to decide in favour of the Latvian company and the Swedish trade unions had to back-pedal. He went on to add that the Left must recognise that the EU's fundamental aims are free movement of goods, persons, work and capital. It is clear that Brussels will place emphasis on the privatisation of services that is welcomed by those who defend the treaties. It is difficult to defend trade union rights and the Swedish model, he said, adding that capital is the only thing which knows no national borders. MEP Robert Musacchio (Italy) recalled the great demonstration in Rome on 19 October at which 50,000 people protested against the services directive, which is a “good example of European mobilisation”. Criticism against the Gebhardt compromise are severe, Mr Musacchio continued, announcing the arrival in Brussels of an Italian trade union delegation “to continue the fight”. “Mr Prodi, who won the primary in Italy, has said he is more in agreement with this directive”, Roberto Musacchio said, asking: ”Can one defend the social models at national level only? I believe it should be at European level”. His Greek colleague Dimitris Papadimoulis said that, “in Sweden, McCreevy demonstrated that the Swedish social model is not that upheld by the Commission! Our fight is to defend the achievements of the Swedish social model and to ensure that it becomes European-wide”. Steven Bell, who represents communication workers in the United Kingdom, stressed that trade unions are “resolutely opposed to the Bolkestein directive and continue to campaign against it, despite the considerable pressure they are subjected to”. “Privatisation of services has not awaited Blair or Thatcher! We must reflect on how to protect our social model”, Hugh Keer of the Scottish National Party, said. “The services directive is an all-out attack against our sector”, Nick Crook of the British public service union (Unisson) noted, recalling that Thames Water is owned by a German multinational and that British electricity belongs to Electricité de France. “Since Jacques Delors' arrival, the British trade unions have said yes to Europe as it was in their interest to do so. Some of them, however, have despite everything taken a stance against the Constitution for the reasons that we all know. Our support is conditional”, he concluded.