Europa: Welche Lösung für welche Krise?

Nun da die institutionellen Debatten abgeschlossen sind, muss die EU eine tiefgreifende Diskussion über Grundsatzfragen führen, schreibt Olivier Lacoste, Forschungsleiter bei Confrontations Europe. Welche europäischen Politiken sollten zum Beispiel geschaffen werden?

The following contribution was sent to EURACTIV by Olivier Lacoste.

„The 3rd of November 2009 marked the end of one crisis and implicitly signalled the continuation of another. It was on this date that the Czech president, Vaclav Klaus, signed the Lisbon Treaty and the Commission published its autumn economic forecast for 2009-2011.

Institutional crisis: a president brought in on the quiet

The end of the institutional crisis, and therefore of a long period of uncertainty, has not been celebrated with as much enthusiasm as might have been expected.

In fact, one might be forgiven for thinking that Europe’s citizens have not even noticed that, on 19 November, EU leaders approved the Swedish Presidency’s proposal to appoint Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy as president of the European Council of heads of state (Article 15 of the European Union Treaty), and Catherine Ashton, the EU trade commissioner, as high representative for foreign affairs and security policy (Article 18).

Of course, the new European Council president was not ‚elected‘ and the high representative was not ’nominated‘ on 19 November, as the Lisbon Treaty came into force on 1 December. But the fact that they did not officially take up their posts does not explain why 19 November was almost a non-event for Europe’s citizens.

The mood has been dampened somewhat by the fact that the European Council’s decision was not openly discussed within the framework of a public debate on the Union’s future. Both positions, which had for a long time been presented as symbols of European visibility, have been filled as a result of behind-the-scenes deals between Europe’s capitals. This has prompted Euro-MP Daniel Cohn-Bendit to describe the appointment of the new president as a „caricature of democracy“ (in the 18 November edition of the French daily newspaper Libération) and a missed opportunity to federate around the European idea.

But let’s look to the future, and wish the best of luck to these two political figures.

Economic crisis: an uncertain outcome

At first glance, the European Commission’s economic forecast gives cause for optimism, as it predicts that the Union’s GDP – after shrinking by 4.1% in 2009 – will grow by 0.75% in 2010 and around 1.5% in 2011.

On closer inspection, the Commission seems more concerned about medium-term trends. It believes that financing will prove more costly than before the downturn, that the trend towards clearing debt will largely continue, that the full impact of the downturn on employment and public finances has not yet been felt, and that there will be a shift in the international environment.

This is only one step away from supposing that long-term European growth, which stood at around 2.25% a year in the past, has gone down a notch to 1.5% a year. If this were the case, employment prospects would be jeopardised for a long time to come.

What can be done to sustain potential growth? The imminent revision of the Lisbon Strategy needs to be accompanied by an in-depth discussion of fundamental issues. For instance, what European policies should be put in place? To push the debate forward, Confrontations Europe has set up a meeting on 18 November with several MEPs, member-state, Commission and social-partner representatives, and economists.

A stronger internal market

In the aim of sustaining potential growth, debate over the single market is back in force. President Barroso, in the guidelines he put forward on 3 September, spoke of it as „the rock on which European growth is built“. On 20 October, he appointed Mario Monti, a former commissioner, to draft a report on ways to revive the internal market. This work is crucial, and it will gain in intensity during the revision of the Lisbon Strategy. In effect, a market needs to be built up: liberalisation alone is not an effective solution.

It will take more than its four areas of free movement (goods, services, capital, people) and its „mutual recognition“ principle to strengthen the internal market. We also need to harmonise legislation where needed, in other words build common legal standards. This harmonisation needs to cover a wide field, including consumer protection for example (will people continue buying goods over the Internet from other member states if they get taken in by the seller?) and the legal and fiscal measures applied to businesses.

However, the internal market is not only underpinned by law. To operate, it needs the support of „public goods“, like the nave of a gothic cathedral that needs to be supported by flying buttresses. We have to invest in infrastructures (transport, energy, etc.). We need to push forward the integration of certain sectors (e.g. telecommunications, energy) by moving towards – why not? – regulatory bodies at European level. We also need certain common goods to be managed at European level. In this respect, the proposal of the Commission concerning the ‚digital dividend‘ has the virtue of concretely fuelling the internal market debate.

Investment in human capital and long-term financing at the heart of the ‚Entretiens Economiques Européens‚

Confrontations has also organised a series of European Economic Discussions (‚Entretiens Economiques Européens‚) on 10 and 11 December, with a view to defining concrete crisis resolution strategies. Training, employment and long-term financing will all feature on the agenda. Under what framework should industrial restructuring programmes be organised and managed? How should we develop training for newly-emerging jobs? How do we finance long-term investments in a restricted financial environment? What responsibilities do the private and public sectors have, and how should they be cooperating? For more information, see our website!