Brussels, 04/09/2007 (Agence Europe) - At the request of the Conference of Presidents of the political groups at the European Parliament, European Commissioner Charlie McCreevy (Internal Market, Services) explained to MEPs the Commission's approach on the future of the Gdansk shipyards. In order to keep the shipyard viable, the Commission is demanding that two out of the shipyard's three docks be closed, with, as the trade union Solidarnosc points out, the loss of many jobs. This raises one question: Is the Commission, or to be more exact its DG Competition, indifferent to the social problems caused by closure and is it forgetting that the shipyard is a symbol of recognised social values?
The Gdansk shipyard, like those of Szeczcin and Gdynia, has received public subsidies to assist it in its restructuring plan. Last Friday, Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes had told Polish trade unionists who had come to Brussels to protest against the threat of lay-offs, that the Commission had no problem with such subsidies on condition that the Gdansk shipyard cut its production capacity to ensure that there is no competition distortion that can injure the Szczecin and Gdynia shipyards or any other shipyards in Europe. Speaking to the plenary, Charlie McCreevy restated his argument. Some aid is compatible with the Treaty and it is enough to refer back to the corresponding guidelines, he said, adding that restructuring of the Gdansk shipyard has been put off every year. The aim, he went on, is to keep a company that has run out of steam going. He underlined three things: (1) restructuring to make the shipyard a viable and lasting entity. The shipyard must be smaller but autonomous; (2) Competition distortion must be limited. Capacity must be reduced. Restructuring must be carried out using own resources; (3) Polish shipyards in Szczecin and Gdynia and/or other shipyards in Europe have had to cut their production capacity. Gdansk is no exception. The Commissioner recalled that structural funds had been used to help these shipyards and that the Commission was working in close contact with the Polish authorities to find a solution that not only meets the wishes of the public authorities but also those of the workers. The Commission takes the view that the Gdansk shipyards are obviously entitled to a future in the shipbuilding sector.
After hearing the Commission's representative, Polish MEPs took the floor to explain their concern about the risk of dismantling their country's flagship company, the symbol of solidarity and worker opposition to the communist regime. Janusz Lewandowski (EPP-ED) said “this debate must not be a political demonstration. We hope it will take us to a solution that will make it possible to keep our shipyard going and make it viable. Twenty-seven years ago, I took part in the activities that started in Gdansk and allowed the Solidarnosc trade union to be formed. Many Solidarnosc representatives are still working on the site, without any violence! They set an example. I understand the frustration felt by the workers of the shipyards. Workers should not be condemned for the role that they played or for the role of the government”. Mr Borislaw Liberadzki (PES) said “the process of transformation in Poland is not only very important for Europe but also for the world as a whole, mainly from the point of view of human dignity. The shipbuilding industry is considerable and in this field we need to adopt a global approach. Privatisation calls for caution but its timetable must be precise. The Commission must fully cooperate with the stakeholders of the shipyard and with the management of the Gdansk shipyard”. Taking the floor, Bronislaw Geremek (ALDE) pointed out that “Europe does have a heart. Which is why the social model is so important. Today, this historic shipyard is faced with a situation where the Commission demands that it cut its production capacity by two-thirds. The size of the company must be reduced so that the company becomes profitable again in order to save jobs. But one must not forget that this site is a symbol of the expression of social values. And we must not forget that it is a community of persons. So: - Yes to innovation, yes to competitiveness, yes to the attention given to the fate of the people affected by restructuring”. Marcius Libicki (UEN) underlined the historical aspect of the shipyard, saying: “We would not be a 27-member Europe freed of the threat of nuclear war if we had not had Solidarnosc”. Witold Tomczak, the Polish representative of the IND/DEM Group, drew attention to the fact that “the whole EU shipbuilding industry together only makes up one third of the Korean industry”. Maciej Giertych (NA, Poland) felt that the Commission's proposal to reduce the docks from three to one would not prevent the company from becoming viable over time.
Aid awarded to the Gdansk yards will not distort competition”. Jozef Pinior (PES) said that “Gdansk, these are civic rights, it has become a symbol for unions and workers. At present we are confronted by casino capitalism. We hope that a reasonable compromise will be reached allowing the single market, and also the jobs of more than 3,000 workers, to be kept”. Genowefa Grabowska (PES) said that “internal market and competition rules often work for the interests of EU economic development. Plans that are unable to abide by internal market rules are doomed to failure. The demonstration in Brussels was against a decision which, in the eyes of the demonstrators, condemns their shipyard to death. They want the chance to work and call on the Commission to base its decision on credible signs. The demonstration was a protest by Polish European citizens, not the Polish government!” she exclaimed. Marius Miroslaw Piotrowski (UEN) said “the workers believe the Commission's approach is unfair. A million people have left Poland to find work elsewhere, and this trend is continuing. The workers want a useful job in their own country. It's a pity the Commission has fallen into the trap of partiality, only listening to some lobbies”. “I would like the Commission to acknowledge the strategic importance of these yards to Poland and to the European economy,” said Mary Lou McDonald (GUE/NGL, Ireland). Francis Wurtz was strongly critical of the Commission. “DG Competition did not need this further matter to demonstrate its doctrine. There is no shortage of precedents on companies in difficulty being required to cut jobs by their hundreds under pain of having to repay the aid that is needed for their very survival. Let them tell us, in this present case, which shipyard exists without subsidies!” And he went on, “That conditions have to be put on the award of subsidies seems to me to be unquestionable, but these conditions systematically involve heavy sacrifices for workers. And it's there that the problem lies. This time, DG Competition has demonstrated that political challenges leave it just as indifferent as social issues. In its view, there is a time to celebrate the historic role of the Gdansk shipyard workers and another to apply the iron laws of neo-liberalism to them. There is still time to stop this irresponsible action”. For this, Mr Wurtz believes the first measure that needs to be taken is to “open in-depth talks with the Polish unions and the European Steelworkers' Federation to both clarify the real amounts received by these yards and, above all, to find a solution which would mean that there were no job losses. An in-depth, public, pluralist debate on the purpose of the Union and on the coherence of the policies being implemented is absolutely necessary before any definitive decision is taken on the future European Treaty”.
In conclusion, Commissioner McCreevy tried to give some reassurance. “The Commission well understands the historic importance of Gdansk and is seeking to make this shipyard viable once again. But it is obliged to treat all shipyards in Europe and in Poland equally.” (gb)