Brussels, 01/03/2006 (Agence Europe) - The European Commission's adoption on 1 March of the Regulation for creating a Globalisation Adjustment Fund (GAF: EUROPE 9141) aims to create a new initiative for making growth and job creation a reality by helping Europeans tackle and take full advantage of globalisation.
The president of the Commission José Manuel Barroso underlined to the press that, “No Member State, not even one of the biggest, can respond to globalisation alone. The Fund is a kind of European insurance policy and will equip workers with new tools for new and better jobs. The fund is for citizens, people”. According to Mr Barroso the Commission had opted for a modern social policy by proposing this fund, which focuses on people. It is testimony to Union solidarity and completes action by Member States at a national, regional and local level. The fund will help finance and personalise different services such as aid for finding employment. It values the spirit of enterprise and salary compensation for workers aged over 50 who have lost their jobs, noted Mr Barroso, who explained, “We want to introduce reforms, to take action in the social arena with added value. Therefore, to do everything possible to make Europe an actor in and not only a spectator of globalisation. The fund will have EUR 500 million a year. This demonstrates our determination to meet the challenges of globalisation, including the social aspects”.
The Commissioner for Social affairs and Employment, Vladimir Spidla said that globalisation did not halt at borders. He explained that in the future every country and every government would be confronted by changes to which they would have to respond to avoid “small regions and small countries being left out”. The Commissioner indicated that the “philosophy of the fund is compensation, flexibility and social justice. Money from the fund should help in actively seeking work. It is therefore not compensation for unemployment”.
In reply to questions, president Barroso said that in order to deal with the pressures of globalisation they needed to make a distinction between the EU and the outside world, “this instrument is a European instrument. It is not about saying that some Member States are going to defend themselves against others…It is about adapting to the impact of globalisation”. In answer to the question about how the fund would bring added value, Mr Barroso gave a vigorous explanation, “We want to show how Europe is concerned about its workers. We are for globalisation but also recognise that there are disappointments. Added value is social value, social responsibility, solidarity”. The president also explained that, “we want to help those who are suffering from globalisation”. In answer to a question about why not extend the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty (ECSC), Mr Barroso explained that the fund was the opposite of a sectoral approach and that it would be of value for all workers and sectors affected by globalisation. Was the “Chinese shoe” affair connected with the fund? “It is a classic fund case because it involves a sector affected by increased competition in the world markets and which can be characterised by a sudden change in events. The impact has been significant in the sector in Europe, many workers have suffered”, explained Mr Barroso who added, “by planning the fund we were also thinking of this sector in particular but the decision to intervene has to be taken on a case-by-case basis by the Commission and at the request of Member States”.
Commissioner Spidla was asked about whether sugar beet producers in France could use the fund. He replied that, “only cases involving unexpected events involving the fund. In other cases there are other instruments. In agriculture, evolution is not unplanned, consequently French sugar beet producers cannot benefit from the fund”.
Commenting on the proposal in a press release, Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson declared, “We need to embrace globalisation not block it, but we must also help individuals adjust to inevitable trade shocks. A Globalisation Adjustment Fund would allow us to act quickly to help workers with retraining and reduce the risk of people trapped in long-term unemployment. It helps us build new jobs, and provide new opportunities, rather than simply protecting old ones”.
We recall that, in order to benefit from a contribution from the Fund, Member States must provide clear proof of job losses and relocation towards third countries, and request such a contribution from the Commission within ten weeks counting from the date when the territorial and sectoral intervention criteria have been fulfilled. These criteria are: - either the dismissal of at least 1,000 employees from a company in a region where unemployment is higher than the Community or national average; - or the dismissal, during a six-month period, of at least 1,000 employees from one or several companies in a single sector that represents at least 1% of total employment for that region. With a maximum of EUR 10,000 per worker concerned over a period of 18 months, the Fund (whose maximum annual allocation is EUR 500 million) can help 35,000 to 50,000 workers of the EU affected by major structural changes in global trade.
European Parliament's first reactions are mixed or very negative
On the side of the European Parliament, first reactions are somewhat mixed. The president of the Party of European Socialists (PES), Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, says in a press release that: “If it (the Fund) is used to enable people to benefit from new opportunities this would be a small but useful contribution to a more positive approach to adjusting to the impact of globalisation.” The former Danish prime minister sounded a note of caution, however, saying that the creation of the Fund “does not in any way take away from the duty of Member States to invest in education, research and development and the other preconditions for the creation of new jobs”. British Conservative Syed Kamall is clearly more sceptical, saying in a press release that the new fund could “become the European Union's version of social security”. The London MEP continues saying: “The European Commission's goals may be honourable but this fund will compete with national social security programmes. The Commission is saying it knows better than elected governments how to spend taxpayers' money on social security. The EU already has the European Social Fund for retraining workers following redundancy. The Commission would be better off handing the cash back to national governments who can be held accountable for their spending”.