Brussels, 13/06/2006 (Agence Europe) - On 7 June in Brussels, the president of the European Social Observatory (ESO), Pierre Jonckheer MEP (Belgium, Green) presented the EU Social Balance Sheet 2005 report. Coordinated by the ESO, published by the ETUC's European Union Institute (EUI) and supported by the Swedish Saltsa union research programme, this publication seeks to provide a reference point in the analysis of social policy in the EU in 2005. The report (ISBN 2-87452-028-4) is available in French and English from the ESO (http: //www/ESO.be) and EUI (http: //http://www.etui-rehs.org ).
Beginning the work, Philippe Pochet, director of ESO and author of the article in this report “The Social Model in Debate: Recent Developments Involving, Actors, Strategies and Dynamics”, identified four groups of actors: (1) “traditional” economists (who have been at the forefront of the internal market and monetary union), for whom national labour markets should be deregulated; (2) economists supporting “the theory of endogenous growth” (whose importance is due to the position they have at DG Economy/Finance at the European Commission) and who think that growth should be increased via investment in research, education and life-long training. They also believe that the market is not a panacea and that national budgets should be reoriented towards key growth areas; (3) the moderate Left, who do not fundamentally question monetary Union but who would like to see a genuine social Union; (4) the traditional Left, for whom the Maastricht criteria should be changed and the European Central Bank (ECB) given the objective of full-employment. Mr Pochet presented three future scenarios: (1) Voice: alliance of social actors from groups 3 and 4, to carry out, for example enhanced cooperation based around EMU; (2) Loyalty: new compromise between groups 2 and 4 to preserve “Lisbon”; (3) Exit: return to the subsidiarity principle on social affairs, in order to be able to return to “focus on changes to economic and monetary affairs”.
“Better Legislation” just an expression to be trotted out again or a hidden agenda? asked Eric Van den Abeele, Professor at the University of Mons, and author of the article “Better Legislation, A Shift away for the Community Method?” According to the latter, the agenda “Better Legislation” should in no case: - undermine the very principle of Community rulings, neither should it question the necessity of the aims pertaining to the general interest or undermine the Community acquis under cover of simplification.
In his presentation of his article “Three Angles of Attacking the European Social Question from the Outside” , Pierre Defraigne, director of the EUR-IFRI and a former senior European civil servant, affirmed that the guarantee of a powerful Europe: - had to be built on an institutional basis, and by speaking with one voice at the WTO, for example; - that it has a common message and vision of the project for society; - that it is an indivisible power in its decision-making at an international level, for example on questions such as Iran. He concluded by stressing the need for ethical reasons on which to develop a European social model and work towards a project for society.