Differences confirmed. The initiatives from Jacques Delors (for a “social protocol” to be added to the Treaty) and Jean-Claude Juncker (for reflection to be given on how to share the fruits of growth) bring a breath of fresh air to the European atmosphere generally felt to be gloomy and grey. But the day is far from won. Certainly neither acted alone, they did not just put ideas out in the abstract. Mr Delors was speaking on behalf of the Party of European Socialists (PES), his report was co-written by Poul Nyrup Rasmussen and he had received the firm support of the secretary general of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), John Monks (who, as we know, is British). Mr Juncker spoke after chairing the first exchange of views with his colleagues in the eurogroup, and he had been backed by the chairman of the Ecofin Council and the European economic and monetary affairs commissioner (see this column in EUROPE 9378).
This does not mean that the path is laid out. The indications published in this column yesterday on the confidential work being carried out among the 27 member states to draw up a draft declaration to mark the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome on 25 March show the extent to which the very conceptions of the European Community differ from one member state to another. The British request that the single currency and the removal of controls on persons at borders inside the Union are not included among Europe's successes demonstrates an odd conception of the nature and aims of the European Union.
And let us not forget the joint declaration of 14 February, to which the labour ministers of France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Cyprus and Luxembourg subscribed. In calling for “new impetus for social Europe”, these ministers did not limit their ambitions to the internal workings of the single market: they also referred explicitly to European identity with regard to the outside world. The declaration said: “We call on the European Union to commit itself to the promotion, on the international level, of the values and principles of its social model. To help bring about fairer and balanced globalisation, social clauses have to be included in all of the EU's trade agreements with third countries, and consideration of principles and fundamental rights, such as those defined by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), must be encouraged on the multilateral level”. I do not think I am mistaken when I say that these sentences are not strangers to the fact that, for the moment, no more than nine countries have signed this declaration. And what can be said about the statement by Polish Education Minister Roman Giertych that Europe should ban abortion before thinking about a constitutional treaty (see EUROPE 9378)? It is clear that each member state determines the major social problems in its own way, according to the wishes of its electorate, and that Europe should not intervene in any way.
Company taxation, fruits of growth. Elsewhere, the debate in the Ecofin Council on the appropriateness of European rules on taxation of company profits (one of the key elements in the measures which Mr Delors considers essential in the context of social Europe) has confirmed the wide divisions between member states. It is interesting to note here that all the eurozone countries, except one, support a uniform tax base as a first step towards harmonisation of levels. The odd one out is Ireland, and if its position develops (and some top political figures believe this to be possible), this will be another example of the division between the euro countries and most of the others. We will see in the next two days what the European Council will have to say about this in its conclusions.
One further remark. With regard to reflection on redistributing the fruits of growth, some commentators have spoken about disagreement “on everything” between the eurogroup and the European Central Bank (ECB), and also of strong opposition from employers (Business Europe). This is a view which is more sensationalist than truth seeking. In fact, we have seen the great care both Mr Delors and Mr Juncker took to express their respect for the ECB's areas of competence and responsibility, and Business Europe President Mr Seillière was more concerned about the decisions the ECB will take next week on interest rates than about the reflection within the eurogroup, calling on companies themselves to reflect on the link between shareholders' profits and wages, particularly within the framework of the social dialogue. This is a typical dialectic which should not be sensationalised. The real problem is the differences over the conception of Europe. (F.R.)