Strasbourg, 25/10/2005 (Agence Europe) - José Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, and Charlie McCreevy, Commissioner in charge of the internal market, explained to the plenary meeting of the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday the position of the Commission on the "Vaxholm" case, between a Latvian company and a Swedish union (see EUROPE 9050). The Commission has no wish to call the social models into question, but stresses the need to uphold the fundamental freedoms of the treaty. The reactions of the MEPs point to a similar Left/Right gulf to the one between the MEPs in talks underway on the proposed directive on services in the internal market (see EUROPE 8989). On behalf of the workers, the Left accuses the Commission of promoting lowest common denominator social standards. In the view of the Right wing, the enhanced competitiveness of the internal market alone would allow these standards to be kept at a high level.
"The Commission is convinced that it is possible to reconcile the four freedoms of the treaty with the different social models chosen by the Member States", said José Manuel Barroso. Its "role" is to "ensure that the social acquis and legislation on the internal market are respected and applied in all Member States without discrimination", he added, adding that the "bottom line" of the Swedish social model was "entirely positive". The president of the European Commission has discussed this affair "personally" with the Latvian and Swedish Prime Ministers. He says that we must now "wait for the Court to take position", because the "European Parliament is not a court, it is a political institution ". He asked the question: "are we for or against the free movement of workers, with total respect for the legislation of the Member States?". He feels that "there will be other cases of this kind in the future", which will find their solution in the promotion of "economic and social cohesion" via "ambitious financial perspectives". "The Commission is not casting aspersions on the organisation of Unionist relations" in the Member States and "recognises the important role played by collective conventions", said Charlie McCreevy. The Commissioner said that the internal market and the social model were " two dimensions which must move forward together". On the "Vaxholm" case, the Commission "has not yet reached a definitive opinion"; when it has, it will be presented on the basis of the provisions of the treaty on the free movement of services (article 49), the principle of non-discrimination (article 12) and the directive 96/71/EC on seconded workers. Charlie McCreevy did, however, find it "a little extraordinary to be having to justify the comments he made", and said that he was very little bothered "whether his opinions bother certain people". He said that he made "no distinction between the Member States", and that he had never said that any one social model was better than any other.
Mr McCreevy's words did not represent "an attack on unions' power at the level of collective conventions", said German Christian Democrat Hans-Gert Pöttering, president of the EPP/ED group, who added that "the systems must react to the implementation of the internal market". "Nobody within my group would like the 'services' directive to call employment rights into question", he went on, "anybody who does want that is anti-European". Hans-Gert Pöttering said "people's fears must be taken seriously", but without "pointing the finger at a representative of the Commission". He feels that "the citizens of the new Member States must not be considered to be second-class citizens", and we must defend "the internal market as the only possibility to be competitive". Gunnar Hökmark (EPP/ED, Sweden) accused his left-wing Swedish colleagues of making "propaganda to protect social tourism", and denied that there was any link between this affair and the "services" directive. "The new Member States want to have the opportunity to work on the European market", he said.
"You are clearly on the right wing, virtually a neo-liberalist!", German Social Democrat Martin Schulz levelled at the Commissioners. The president of the PES group said that this group was fighting for "social progress to be preserved and for the new Member States to reach this level". He asked José Manuel Barroso directly: are you in favour of the right to strike? Is the Swedish social model compatible with the internal market? He added: "the citizens want jobs, but not with Chinese salaries or Asian working conditions! They want a decent wage, to give them and their children a future". Martin Schulz finished off by saying that the globalisation adjustment fund proposed by the Commission on Thursday 20 October must not "pay for the victims of Charlie McCreevy's policy", or it will find itself losing the support of the PES group (see EUROPE 9053). In total agreement with him, Swedish Socialist Jan Andersson accused the Commission "of being responsible for a race to the bottom".
British Liberal Democrat Graham Watson described as "disappointing" the attitude of those who "accuse the Commission of not being at the centre, but (...) do not realise that the Centre has shifted", said the president of the group ALDE. In this case, he wondered whether it was the fault of the Latvian company or the Swedish union, which wanted to protect its workers above respecting the rules of the internal market? He feels that it is not by dint of "protectionism that we will help growth to increase and be able to compete with China and India". Speaking on behalf of the Greens/EFA group, Carl Schlyter of Sweden said that Charlie McCreevy had committed the "classic mistake" of believing that it was possible to apply "a temporary formula", which had worked in Ireland when he was finance minister, at European level. The risk is that we may end up with a "euro-sclerosis led by the EU". French communist Francis Wurtz, president of the group GUE/NGL, spoke of his solidarity with the PES group. He regretted the fact that the "brutal and provocative" Commissioner McCreevy had been able to "unfortunately take the rules of the treaty as his basis" whilst reiterating his aversion to the very principle of mutual recognition (see EUROPE 9054). With the "Vaxholm" case, we are running a very great risk of allowing "pluralist Europe to bring pressure to bear and renege on our national commitments", said Nils Lundgren (ID, Sweden), who believes that "the Swedish system of collective conventions is under threat". Irish member Brian Crowley, co-president of the group UEN, regretted the fact that this debate "is focusing on how to maintain an archaic system". When arguments carry no more weight, "personal attacks" are launched, he added, and this is "the most detestable form of political discourse".
The "Vaxholm" case has been relaunched further to the recent comments by Charlie McCreevy during a visit to Sweden. The Commissioner for the Internal Market took position in favour of the Latvian company "Laval un partneri", which had refused to apply Swedish collective conventions on salaries to its Latvian employees who had been seconded to a building site in Vaxholm, near Stockholm. The Swedish union "Byggnads" took exception to this, preventing the building work from continuing. The Court of Justice of the EU is to respond to a preliminary question. Sweden, the United Kingdom and Ireland apply no restrictions to the free movement of workers from the new Member States on their territories.