Brussels, 07/07/2008 (Agence Europe) - The revised social agenda adopted by the European Commission last week was welcomed rather coolly by all political actors, civil society and European social partners combined. This agenda certainly notes the advances made in the wellbeing of European citizens but these advantages are, as described by the Secretary General of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), John Monks, “a modest step forward”.
The holistic approach in the social package was the subject of harsh criticism from the GUE/NGL and its president, Francis Wurtz MEP, “the new 'social package' consists mainly of non-legislative communications, reports and recommendations whose effect in terms of promoting measureable progress towards Social Europe is doubtful. On the legislative front, the main thrust of the Commission's policies continues to be a Europe in which market liberalisation, deregulation and flexible labour are being prioritised first and foremost”. Fintan Farrell, the director of the European Anti-poverty Network (EAPN) took the same tone, “the package of measures proposed are insufficiently coherent to impact on the current levels of poverty and exclusion in the EU, to address the current challenges to social cohesion - particularly related to rising prices and economic recession and to reverse the growing trend towards the erosion of social rights”. He added that, “the revised social agenda will fail to build a 'social consensus” in the EU because its major policies, such as internal market and growth and jobs, are not clearly re-orientated towards the objective so social cohesion”. The Secretary General of the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest (CEEP), Rainer Plassmann, said that they should perhaps be talking about a “shopping list” because there is no way of identifying urgent and priority actions in it. The Secretary General of Eurocommerce, Xavier Durieu said that the holistic approach was, “interesting…but insufficiently focused on flexicurity principles”.
Philippe de Buck the Secretary General from Businesseurope said that this disappointment involves the proposal for a revised directive on European works councils. De Buck affirms that this proposal, “creates far-reaching difficulties for companies and does not facilitate social dialogue”. John Monks said that they were waiting for, “stronger and more ambitious initiatives”. Dimitris Papadimoulis (GUE/NGL, Greece) said “that the proposal now on the table is weak and disappointing” and ignores the main demands in the report from Wilfried Menrad (EPP-ED, Germany), which was already demanding revision of the directive in 2001 (EUROPE 7957), particularly the “strengthening of EWCs' rights on proper information and consultation in due time, especially in relation to take-overs, mergers and restructuring, and a system of sanctions in case of non-compliance”. Bernard Lehideux (ALDE, France) welcomed the revised ECC directive but warned, “We will ensure during the examination of the text, that workers' consultation will take place upstream of restructurings and that the EWCs have sufficient information and the means to intervene on questions that are often very technical. The transnational EWCs are a useful tool for forming a Social Europe”.
Francis Wurtz was just as critical of the draft directive on patient rights in cross-border health care, which, “aims at codifying the ECJ case law on patient mobility based on an 'internal market' approach. We think that all the issues addressed here must be solved within the existing framework of the coordination of social security schemes (Regulation 883/2004/EC). There is no need for a new Directive based on an internal market approach to health care. We strongly oppose the re-introduction of 'Bolkestein' through the backdoor”. John Monks regretted that, “the ETUC regrets the predominantly “consumption”- focused approach taken as potentially undermining the solidarity on which health care systems are founded and widening the inequalities in access to health care, especially by the poorest in society”.
The director for social affairs at the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UEAPME), Liliane Volozinskis, said that she was afraid that the new draft directive on fighting all discrimination outside of work could create, “new burdens and costs for SMEs”. Gabi Zimmer (GUE/NGL, Germany) strongly criticised the fact that, “insurance and other financial products are not to be covered by the Directive, allowing the financial and insurance industry to go on demanding higher contributions because of the risks related to health, age, gender and disability”. It is unacceptable that the Commission has given in to industry pressure. Discriminatory practices in insurance and financial products must be prohibited by the directive”. Michaela Koller, Director General of the CEA (Insurers of Europe) said that that “if the proposed restrictions are placed on insurance it will have the opposite effect to that which the Commission intends. These legal restrictions on risk-equivalent calculations must be avoided to ensure that insurance pricing is adequate, reasonable and fair”. Deborah Lambillotte, Co-chair of Executive Board of ILGA-Europe (International Lesbian and Gay Association) was concerned that the proposed directive leaves out protection of homosexuals against differential treatment on the basis of marital/family status and in the area of reproductive rights.
Finally, there was still much to be done on the situation Roma inclusion, said Pascale Charhon, Director of the European Network Against Racism (EANR), stating that the Commission document resembled “an inventory”. The ALDE group in the European Parliament urged the Commission, Council and member states to protect the human rights of the Roma people and to launch an action plan on integrating Roma communities. German MEP Alexandre Alvaro called on the Italian government to “step back from this racist exercise of ethnic profiling” (i.e. taking finger prints, including those of minors). The same concerns were expressed by Italian MEP Marco Cappato who said that “the (Italian) government should stop these policies immediately and should refrain from public targeting of the Roma community as if it was the source of all crime in Italy - which they are not”. Cappato said that “Italy has to finally devise a policy on Roma providing real instruments for integration, including by fully using the funds provided by the EU, as illustrated in the Commission document issued today”. Hungarian MEP Viktoria Mohacsi said that a full EU strategy on the Roma should “comprise effective, detailed and in-depth measures against discrimination to be implemented at the EU, but notably at member states' level. I hope the Commissioners will meet the expectations of the citizens of the 27 EU member states”. The Socialist group in the EP felt that Europe needed to give greater importance to the integration of the Roma and reject the pursuit of impoverished children. “Putting the fingerprints of Roma children in a database for law enforcement and identification purposes … amounts to discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity,” stated the PES group. Its deputy leader, Jan Marinius Wiersma, and the Socialist coordinator on the EP civil liberties committee, Claudio Fava, said, “We see no place for such instruments in today's European Union. This measure could lead to the reappearance of population registers based on race. We can't accept it”. Wiersma said, “I suggest Sarkozy, as President of the EU, step in and convince Berlusconi to recall the proposal”'. (G.B./transl.rh/rt)