Key function. The conclusions of last week's European Council (reproduced as an annex to this bulletin for those who have not yet read them and may wish to have them available in a few pages) are both disappointing and encouraging. Disappointing in that they do not contain any real decisions; encouraging in that they testify to the summit returning to its key function, which is not to appease conflicts or negotiate compromises but to affirm the broad outlines of EU activity and to point the way for this to be made a reality. Past experience shows that this is the correct formula, even in cases where the initial reaction was one of disappointment, as for the Lisbon strategy which, although considered too theoretical in the beginning, has gradually become the guide for reform and economic policy in Europe. The conclusions of 14 March cover three key areas: a) the new phase (2008-2010) of European growth and employment policy; b) the climate change package; c) the financial markets and currency.
These texts do not contain any astonishing revelations. They are the result of long and sometimes difficult discussions and negotiations, at all levels, and in some cases are compromises which will require further precisions and clarifications. But the orientations retained, which were accepted unanimously, form a consistent whole and are obligatory; the European institutions and the national governments are obliged to take account of them and act in the direction indicated. The European Parliament, of course, retains its freedom of action, but its president has maintained that the institution will cooperate fully in all those areas in which codecision is required. The orientations cover several areas, are quite detailed and precise, and even contain deadlines: June for a political agreement on the single market for electricity and gas; beginning of 2009 for the climate/energy package.
Cost of consensus. It is true that achieving the essential unanimity required concessions, which have inevitably stirred up some disappointment and protest; that is the price of consensus. The heaviest criticism has come from: 1) environmentalists (according to whom Europe has missed an opportunity to draw up stronger environmental protection measures); 2) trade unions and political voices who believe that the social aspect of the European strategy is still too weak and insufficient. These are areas in which it can never be said that we are doing enough or that additional measures are not desirable. But we should nonetheless acknowledge that Europe is still at the vanguard globally in terms of both clean energy and the fight against climate change, and social protection and working conditions.
Acting alone if necessary. The image which emerges from these conclusions is one of a Europe which is calling for a global strategy on climate change and energy, by showing the way forward, but which is determined to go it alone if necessary. On the specific problem of energy-intensive industries, paragraph 19 of the conclusions stresses the need for a European decisions «so that if international negotiations fail, appropriate measures can be taken”, adding: “An international agreement remains the best way of addressing this issue”. This passage is particularly significant. It indicates that the EU is seeking solutions at global level and wishes to see international cooperation, but that it is prepared to act alone if it is not forthcoming. Gordon Brown endorsed the conclusions, which seems to indicate that now he will not be saying that there is nothing between states and globalisation: there is Europe. The part concerning sovereign funds (last part of paragraph 36) states that the EU should provide coordinated input towards “agreeing at international level on a voluntary code of conduct for sovereign wealth funds”. This would be the first time that the EU would participate as such in this kind of negotiation.
The transition towards a safe and sustainable economy should be “consistent with EU sustainable development, competitiveness, security of supply, food security, sound and sustainable public finance and economic and social cohesion” (par. 17). All aspects are mentioned. The 36 paragraphs of the conclusions will be added to with declarations, some of them significant ones from the participants, an exclusive overview of which was given in our last bulletin. Recommended reading.
(F.R.)