.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
Is the European Union a group of economies teaming up to make more profit or should there be a social dimension ? Argument continues to rage, especially in the U.K. The European Trade Union Institute has published an answer which we examine here.
IN 1996 THE EUROPEAN Trade Union Institute (ETUI) commissioned a group of academics to write a 'Manifesto for a Social Europe' designed to influence opinion at that year's Intergovernmental Conference (IGC). With another important IGC due in December the authors have met up again to examine what progress has been made and what more needs to be done. The updated document starts on a pessimistic note, 'After the Treaty of Amsterdam, and on the eve of the new millennium, the European Union remains paralysed. Nationalism is reinforced by a static and rigid interpretation of subsidiarity. Monetarist economism blocks democratic control over the European Central Bank and creates obstacles against effective implementation of the new Employment title of the EC Treaty. Protectionist self-interest prevents Europe taking a lead in reform of the global trading system'.
On enlargement, which is the most prominent item on the agenda for the IGC 2000, the authors wish to see a new definition. 'Enlargement should be not only to excluded states. It should be enlargement to the excluded peoples of Europe. Enlargement should aim to include in the prosperity of the EU also the constituencies of the poor, the unemployed, the old, the ethnic minorities and others whom the common market has excluded, as well as nationals of non-EC Member States. Enlargement should not mean only extending the market to new states, territorial and economic aggrandisement. Social Europe is not about excluded states. Social Europe is about excluded people'.
The second item on the agenda of IGC 2000 seems to be institutional reform which involves such issues as the number of Commissioners each Member State should have and the method of voting in the Council of Ministers. But the Manifesto insists 'The institutional reforms needed are not to Council voting procedures or numbers of Commissioners. The problem is that the European employers' organisations refuse to engage in social dialogue or develop sectoral organisations capable of engaging in social dialogue. And the Commission has failed to adopt a general legislative programme, which would promote and stimulate the social dialogue'. On the third main talking point at the IGC, a common defence and security policy, the academics say, 'A common security and defence policy is irrelevant to the problems of unemployment, poverty and social exclusion, which are far more threatening to Europe than any military crisis. What is needed is not dialogue among military establishments but among the civil societies of Europe'.
In reviewing progress so far on the 'social dimension' the authors have some praise for the Amsterdam treaty which 'included new Titles on Social Policy and Employment' however,'a Social Europe is still not in sight with continuing trends towards both "re-nationalisation" ("Europe a la carte", with different speeds and "opt-outs") and a mere "free market" (and common currency) zone'. National governments too have fallen short: 'The broad majority of Member States have labour or social-democratic dominated governments. However, most of these governments lack both national and European visions of social reform. Although the situation is favourable to a change of direction towards Social Europe, there is missing both a convincing vision, and the political will to take steps to translate it into reality'. If this will is not found, the report predicts dire consequences 'If the requirements of Social Europe continue to be neglected, the outcome will be a chaotic, atomised, brutal, even violent and xenophobic development of society. If the challenge of creating a Social Europe is met, there is the prospect of renewal of the European project'.
As regards gender equality, the report commends article 141 of the treaty of Amsterdam which allows positive action to promote equality between men and women. However, the EU response 'to unequal treatment of men and women in practice has been the official policy of "gender mainstreaming"'. The authors feel 'traditional anti-discrimination policies must be accompanied by new gender policies covering all policy fields' as 'they are likely to be perceived as more general, and increasingly important, for both genders in the course of the on-going process of individualisation in society'. The manifesto sees an important rôle for trade unions in a 'social Europe', 'A crucial feature of the proposed European social citizenship is the role of trade unions' but sees the rise of globalisation as creating 'an urgent need for countervailing power on the workers' side'.
In conclusion the manifesto bemoans the lack of a European constitution and comments that a 'social constitution needs a structure with a strong dynamic element able to articulate and deal with problems in a fast-changing economic, social and political environment'.
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
