The limits and objectives of France's “conversion” to the market economy and free competition have been specified by its President, in a speech before the European Parliament. All week, this column has supported the idea of a Europe which is determined to preserve and extend the powerful manufacturing industry, and the idea of a mutual and progressive rapprochement, from Paris to Brussels and from Brussels to Paris, towards free competition. By laying out his view of Europe to the members of the European Parliament, Nicolas Sarkozy has clarified his country's position on the questions which are at the heart of the debate. Without rehashing all of his speech (which is skilfully summarised in our bulletin 9542) with his conception of European unity and the need for a common defence policy, I would like to look more closely at what he said about the economic aspects.
He welcomed the fact that there are differences of opinion and sensitivities on these subjects on the part of the Europeans, because these differences represent “our greatest wealth, the very foundation of democracy. Democracy is debate, it is the plurality of points of view”. He is calling for discussions: “we must be able to debate everything, the monetary policy, the budgetary policy, the industrial policy, the tax policy, every policy there is”. In particular, the French President spoke of:
- A European identity in globalisation. “The people of Europe are going through a deep identity crisis. This is a crisis both in the nations and in the idea of a civilisation which all Europeans hold in common and which is the real unity of Europe. It is a crisis which is linked to globalisation and the commoditisation of the world”.
- The Community preference. “The word protection should not be banished. If we do not want the people, exasperated at being the victim of unfair competition and dumping, one day to call for protectionism and the closing of our boundaries, we must be able to debate the concept of a potential real Community preference (…) We must be able to take on the same means of action as all the others. If the other nations have the right to defend themselves against dumping, why does not Europe? If all of the countries have change policies, why does not Europe? If other nations can reserve a proportion of their public procurement contracts for their SMEs, why cannot Europe? If other nations implement industrial policies, why does not Europe? If the others defend their farmers, why does Europe not defend its farmers?”
-Energy independence and food autonomy. “Europe does not want protectionism, but it is its duty to ensure its energy independence and its food independence”.
-Free competition. “Europe is committed to competition. But Europe cannot be the only one in the world to make it a religion. This is why the Summit has decided that competition was a means for Europe, and not an end in itself“.
- Market economy and capitalism. “Europe has chosen the market economy and capitalism. But this choice does not mean either absolute laissez-faire or the acceptance of the side slippings of a financial capitalism which rewards speculators and annuitants rather than business people and workers. European capitalism has always been the capitalism of entrepreneurs, the capitalism of production, rather than a capitalism of speculation and yields. Europe has a role to play in the necessary moralisation of financial capitalism, the excesses of which the citizens of the world can no longer carry. Many of them who have placed their hope in Europe out of the world, look to it to take the lead in this fight”.
But Mr Sarkozy said that he was open to everybody's opinion: what he called for is debate: “We have different ideas on different points of view on all of these subjects. This is not a reason not to talk about it- quite the contrary. We must discuss it until we have managed to bring our points of view close enough together to build a common policy”.
It appeared clear, with his questions to which there was not just one answer, that Mr Sarkozy believes that his ideas have validity. But he has only proved that he does not rule out compromise. For the time being, the objective is to open up discussion with the other Member States and within the Community institutions, because, as he said, “it is France's policy to work closely and in the greatest of trust with the European institutions”. Bring on the debate, in the knowledge that there is not just one person alone who holds the truth.
(F.R.)