Brussels, 20/02/2008 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday 20 February, the European Parliament adopted two texts establishing a whole series of recommendations with a view to the European Council debates on 13 and 14 March.
In a lengthy resolution common to the main political groups (minus GUE-NGL and IND-DEM), MEPs again stress the importance of vigorous implementation of the Lisbon Strategy. MEPs support the analysis made by the Commission in its strategic report published in December 2007 (EUROPE 9562) while underlining shortcomings with regard to application of the Lisbon Agenda. European prosperity will depend on whether the conditions that are most propitious for sustainable growth and job creation are created, as well as the possibility of facing up to the challenges of globalisation, demographic change and environmental threats, the Parliament states. It therefore calls for the growth potential of the European economy and internal demand to be enhanced, as it is still considered insufficient. MEPs consider it is essential to safeguard the stability of the financial markets and to set surveillance measures in place. When it comes to R&D, emphasis must be placed on new technologies and services for the “decarbonisation” (i.e. reduction of carbon footprint) of the global economy, they note, welcoming the proposal for establishing a fifth freedom (that of knowledge). MEPs support the proposed European “Small Business Act”. Noting that the Lisbon Strategy has not been to the advantage of all EU citizens, the Parliament demands an ambitious social agenda. It also urges for better involvement by social partners, national parliaments, local and regional authorities, as well as the civil society, and recommends that new qualitative indicators should be used to assess progress and the success of the Lisbon Strategy.
Adopting the report by Margarita Starkeviciutè (ALDE, Lithuania) by 519 votes to 102 and 31 abstentions, MEPs put forward several recommendations aimed at adopting a new three-year cycle (2008-2010) for Broad Economic Policy Guidelines (EUROPE 9593). Their recommendations aim to ensure macroeconomic stability and growth, restore corporate dynamism, strengthen investment in human resources and modernise labour markets.
Contrary to the intentions expressed by the Commission and Ecofin Council in particular (EUROPE 9584 and 9598), which do not wish to amend the integrated guidelines, MEPs suggest specific changes. Such changes are, however, insufficient for the Greens/EFA, which voted against the report. In a press release on behalf of his group, Alain Lipietz deplores this missed opportunity for changing direction and for giving concrete substance to the EU's economic, social and environmental objectives. He bemoans the fact that the EP has refused to approve the amendments of his group aimed at integrating new challenges into the guidelines, such as global warming, supervision of the financial system, tax policy and the policy of change.
During the joint debate the day before, President-in-Office of the Council Ziga Turk had admitted that, with the launching of the new cycle of the Lisbon Strategy, they were not seeking to “reinvent the wheel”. In his view, the Union and the States should, as a matter of priority, recommend a low carbon content economy, do away with the obstacles to achieving the internal market (but without failing in their duty of solidarity towards the weakest) and encourage creativity which is at the basis of all progress and growth. This is valid for the next three years but it is already necessary to “prepare for the post- 2010 period”, Mr Turk said, asserting that Europe does not wish to “give others orders” but rather defend its own values.
“The main social issue of our time is the need to ensure sustainable employment, in sufficient number and quality”. This aim, said Günter Verheugen is at the heart of the Lisbon Strategy and the European response to globalisation. The year 2007 was a good year, the Commission vice-president states, but all the objectives have not been reached and there are still people who feel threatened by the ups and downs of the economy. “Adjustments” will be necessary during the next three years, mainly to intensify the social dimension, ensure that the loss of employment does not necessarily entail marginalisation or poverty, and to increase the supply of jobs. Mr Verheugen underlined the fact that companies had a particularly important responsibility in the light of certain recent events (here, he was alluding to tax fraud that is said to be committed by a large number of economic leaders in his own country, Germany). A strong and responsible industry will facilitate attainment of the priorities of the Lisbon Strategy, Mr Verheugen said, calling for continuity in reforms but keeping a certain critical eye open when it comes to the failings of the past three years (a reference to the need to strengthen the social dimension and the environmental dimension).
Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner Joaquin Almunia confirmed the initially positive analysis of the situation in 2007: increase in growth, improvement in market operation, return of confidence. But the uncertainties which appeared on the financial markets now made the situation more “volatile” (which confirmed the need to speed up reform). While the European economy was doing better in the face of tension on the financial markets (particularly thanks to the policies which govern the Economic and Monetary Union), Almunia said progress still had to be made towards financial integration. The Ecofin Council adopted a roadmap which now had to be put into practice. Its success depended on cooperation among economic and social players, and between the institutions.
The Lisbon Strategy, at least in the way it has turned out, is still not very well liked by the Parliament. Robert Goebbels (PES, Luxemburg) was the first to express his frustration at the attitude of the European Commission which wants to keep the guidelines unchanged. “They seem to be carved in Portuguese marble,” he exclaimed, addressing this warning to Commission President José Manuel Barroso, “We will not accept the Commission's “Nyet” which belongs to another age on the guidelines. The context of the Lisbon Strategy is changing and the text which guides us has to be adapted to the new international situation”. With the current guidelines, we don't have an instrument that will allow us to forge ahead, said Udo Bullmann (PES, Germany).
We support what has been done under the Lisbon Strategy, said Marianne Thyssen (EPP-ED, Belgium), highlighting in particular intellectual property and better regulation with less bureaucracy. The ALDE group's priorities had been picked up in the Lisbon Strategy, stated Bilyana Raeva (ALDE, Bulgaria), and she said she thought it was an appropriate response to meet the challenges of globalisation. Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP-ED, Germany) said that growth and jobs were a sine qua non for a good social and environmental policy, but the link was less obvious for other speakers.
Were we heading towards qualitative and sustainable growth? “I am sceptical,” said Rebecca Harms (Greens/EFA, Germany). The concept of a low carbon economy only hid with difficulty the different stances, because the economy was still implicitly one based on coal and oil. “We would have liked a 180 degree turn” in this area and in social policy, she said. There would also have to be new ecological and social indicators to measure the Lisbon progress, particularly in terms of people's quality of life.
The same point was made by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL, Portugal), who wanted the Lisbon Strategy replaced with a European strategy which laid the emphasis on solidarity and sustainable development, with greater social justice. “How can you say that we are on the right track” when the problems that we had three years ago are still there, asked her colleague Helmuth Markov (GUE/NGL, Germany. The jobs created were mostly short term and there was no re-investment of profits in the economy: “A complete review of economic policy is required” or we are heading straight for disaster, was his conclusion. (A.B./L.G.)