Marseilles, 16/10/2008 (Agence Europe) - At the 7th European Round Table on Poverty and Social Exclusion in Marseilles on 15-16 October, debate returned several times to social inclusion, which is central to the European Commission communication of 3 October (see EUROPE 9756).
This concept is based on three pillars, speakers repeated over the two days: a minimum income system, the importance of labour markets' “inclusiveness”, and readily available and affordable quality social services. “The Commission presents this communication like it was some kind of panacea,” complained Henri Lourdelle of the European Trade Union Confederation, “but that is far from being the case! All it does is rehash things that were in the two 1992 recommendations”. He was critical, in particular, of the lack of concrete commitments. He went on to stress the importance of transition periods between two jobs, which he said were like reconstruction phases. He also called for a “specific legal guarantee” on social services. He highlighted the need to make “ambitious funding” available for active inclusion. He called on European ministers with responsibility for tackling poverty, who met on the sidelines of the round table, not to restrict themselves to statements of intent. “What government could still dare to say, tomorrow, that for social needs, there is no money left, while for the financial sector, we can raise billions of euro?” he asked. He concluded his speech by saying, “It is according to the money put on the table that we measure the importance of a measure”.
In reply, Director of DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Jérôme Vignon said that the communication of 3 October strengthened and completed the two 1992 recommendation. “This work is still relevant, but it isn't applied in all countries,” he said. He felt that the European Commission had, at one and the same time to be “ambitious” and “modest”. “Our institution, with its right of initiative, must play its full role, but we cannot venture into areas where there is not a great deal of consensus. If we did, that would run the risk of failure and missing opportunities to take things forward”. “That role is for the employment and social protection committees,” he said, warning, “If the social protection committee does not take up this issue, inevitably it's the internal market that will find its own standards”.
Speaking on the sidelines of the conference, chairwomen of the social protection committee Elise Willame said she thought that “at least three indicators per pillar” had to be put in place - new indicators, backed up by figures, which would mean that it was possible, for example, to assess the extent of poverty in Europe. She also acknowledged the urgency with which these tools should be put in place. She said that the Commission communication was “not as strong a signal” as the 1992 recommendations, which had been put out by states at the time. However, she felt that there was greater consensus among member states now than 16 years ago.
Closing the round table, European Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Commissioner Vladimir Spidla said he was “optimistic” about tackling poverty. He said that this was so for three reasons: the first meeting of European ministers with responsibility for tackling poverty, the European Commission's adoption of its social agenda in July, and the adoption of national strategies in all member states of the EU. “We will succeed in reducing poverty if we all share the same objectives,” he said. (L.B.S./transl.rt)