Conditional acceptance. The European Union is continuing to progress in defining its attitude towards globalisation. I'm not referring to a “globalisation doctrine”, which is difficult to define, given the differences, but to behaviour. The way things are developing is to accept globalisation if certain conditions are met. The general principle was re-stated this week by the President of the European Parliament Josep Borrell when he opened the EP-National Parliaments meeting: “Europe has to put its efforts into finding a world economic model based on human, social and environmental rights. Sometimes, the lift-off of some economies coincides with exploitation of workers and unjustifiable despoiling of the environment.” In these conditions, “can grow the fear of social and tax dumping leading possibly to what we call a race to the bottom”. Commission President José Manuel Barroso said the same thing in more concise terms: the EU has to accept globalisation “to adapt it according to its values”. Enough of principles.
Position of Eurogroup President. New cause for reflection on a specific case is provided by what was said by the President of the group of countries which have adopted the euro, the Eurogroup, Jean-Claude Juncker, expressing his attitude as Prime Minister of Luxemburg to the hostile takeover bid from the world's largest steel-making group Mittal for the European steel-maker Arcelor. Our bulletin carried the reports. May I give readers an extended quotation? “Against this hostile takeover bid, we put forward the hostility of those who believe that European industry needs European champions who remain real world leaders in steel-making. My country has fought - the people of Luxemburg in general and especially ordinary people - through the increasing tax burden that everyone had to bear to ensure that Luxemburg steel-making remained a reality. We have become (…) a strategic partner of Europe's major steel-making group, born of the combining of the potentials of a French group, a Luxemburg group and a Spanish group. We are not thinking about easy money, the fast buck. We want to remain the Luxemburg strategic partner firmly anchored in European steel-making as a whole. Consequently, we say no to the takeover bid by Mittal for Arcelor.” Juncker then went on, “We are currently putting in place all means of defence, every legal means, against this offensive” (see EUROPE 9121, 9123).
France has adopted a similar attitude. Its Industry Minister François Loos said, “Mittal has infringed all the rules of conduct, the grammar of international finance in this area. You do not bid for a group like Arcelor, the jewel of the European economy, without warning, without discussion, without vision, without a joint industrial project”. The Spanish government expressed its intention align itself with France and Luxemburg. Belgium, which is involved, too, will do the same. Pervenche Berès, Chair of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee at the European Parliament, said it was a political affair which had to be treated as such. It must not be forgotten that Europe has battled and worked for decades to transform steel-making and made huge social, financial and economic efforts and sacrifices to provide itself with a modern and successful steel industry. It would be absurd, according to large section of European political authorities, to launch ambitious new joint projects like “Galileo” and to let the European steel industry go.
Other opinions. It is true that there is no unanimity of opinion and that other, radically different, reactions have been noted, both in the political and business worlds. The question remains completely open, we will see how it develops. I would simply like to emphasise that another aspect to globalisation is now being discussed, in financial, industrial and social terms (employment , of course, but also the “strong culture of social dialogue” in the Arcelor group). I would add that Jean-Claude Juncker's allusion to “easy money” and to “the fast buck” reminds one of Jacques Delors' words on “the worrying power of financial capitalism”, where big companies pursue the aim of paying out annual dividends of 15% to their shareholders, without any worry for social or economic questions (see this column in bulletin 9109).
(F.R.)