SEK Trade Union School 2011 The EU2020 strategy and Economic Governance Nicosia, 19 20 September 2011 Why the Social Dimension of Europe 2020 is an Oxymoron Bart Vanhercke Co-Director, European Social Observatory (OSE) Associate academic staff K.U.Leuven (CESO)
Not about
1. The European Social Observatory Founded in 1984 (OSE) Centre for research, information and training with historical trade union roots Specialises in the social dimension of the EU: social and employment policies Mission is to analyse the mutual influence between the EU and the Member State level (important: reciprocal relationship, not top down )
Network Works closely with Belgian and European public authorities (tendering) Academics (B and EU) Trade unions (B and EU) Civil society organisations
The team (14) Benoît Cécile Dalila David Sophie Bart Françoise Seba/ Tereza Rita Ramón Renaud Pascal Régine Lorena
Our core research topics Employment and restructuring Health care systems Pensions Social Inclusion and Social Protection Institutional issues New forms of governance ( OMC )
At your disposal
Questions/Clarifications during presentation? Interrupt me! (if not I will keep on talking ) Translation (moving target)
Why the Social Dimension of Europe 2020 is an Oxymoron
Careful Why is the Social Dimension of Europe 2020 an Oxymoron (a contradiction) And NOT Why is Social Europe an Oxymoron (easily confused)
1. A small detour about Social Europe A. Social acquis (legislation) non-discrimination (e.g.. pensions, retirement age) Coordination of social security rights (incl. for third country nationals Chilean taxi driver) Working time (hospitals, transport) Patient right (cross-border care) impacts on social policies in all MS (eg. information and consultation)
1. A small detour about Social Europe B. European social dialogue Parental leave (reviewed in 2009) Part time work Etc. C. Structural Funds (ESF and ERDF) Infrastructure (incl. hospitals) Re-integration of persons far away from the labour market (creativity) Priorities more firmly linked to Europe 2020 objectives (conditionality)
1. A small detour about Social Europe D. Internal Market legislation Economic integration through four freedoms (persons, capital, ): cornerstone of European integration (cf. Bolkestein ) But: a social dimension is equally being developed Some examples: European legislation re. equal treatment M/W ( fear for unfair competition issue in Cyprus) Health and safety, e.g. fire prevention, machinery directive (e.g. unsafe FR chainsaws in IT Regions) ( free movement of goods) Protection of victims of car accidents abroad and in the Member States ( free movement of persons)
Internal market Approximation: not towards the bottom nor to an average level but to highest level of protection (often Germany ) Basic reason: shield off external competition (China, Brasil etc.) Social Europe under the radar Internal market legislation: QMV
In sum: Europe 2020 and Social Europe Social Europe cannot be reduced to Lisbon or Europe 2020 Include in assessment of Social Europe Other instruments (legislation, Social Dialogue, Structural Funds) Other policy areas (internal market)
Now, time to address the Oxymoron! Questions/Clarifications?
Remember an Oxymoron? A figure of speech, or a phrase, that combines two notions that seem to be the opposite of each other Examples are deafening silence, extremely average, virtual reality and known secret contradiction in terms/paradox
Why would the social dimensions of Europe 2020 be an oxymoron? First reading of the EU s new socio-economic governance: social issues (employment, social protection and social inclusion) seem far from central
Europe 2020 Integrated Guidelines Stability and Growth Pact 1. Macro-economic surveillance (Integrated Guidelines 1-3) 2. Thematic coordination (Integrated Guidelines 4-10) Monitored through 5 EU Headline Targets 3. Fiscal Surveillance National Reform Programmes (NRPs) (including national targets) Member States - April synchronized Stability and Convergence Programmes (SCP) Member States April Already at first sight the social dimension is far from key!
II. Lisbon and Europe 2020 compared: some progress for Social Europe Europe 2020 provides some progress, when compared to its predecessor ( Titanic 2010 )
1. Europe 2020 presents a more allencompassing strategy Rather comprehensive political agenda for Europe (incl. environmental targets, continued EES) Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth: return to the original Lisbon Strategy more than just growths and jobs (socioeconomic policy triangle), as compared to Revised Lisbon (2005) But: the discourse is changing (crisis, Euro+ Pact)
2. Increased pressure on targets and monitoring of progress European indicators, allowing comparison between Member States (peer pressure, benchmarking ) Cyprus: poverty of elderly (see European Council Recommendation) Poverty among women (esp. single parents) R&D Digital divide Soft law to implement EU legislation beyond its formal transposition
EU Poverty target (decrease AROP by 20 million) - the mere existence is a step forward (even though less ambitious than many hoped) - Social cohesion/inclusion: now the same status as the other political priorities (on paper) - Adoption of national targets: - Increased pressure (e.g. B) - See NRP Cyprus - High pressure on Member States -> taken more seriously than in the past decade (??)
3. Social protection and Social Inclusion are back in (compared to 2005) Increased potential visibility and importance of social issues: Several Integrated Guidelines Guideline 10 re Social Inclusion and combatting poverty Guideline 9 re Education and training (!) Seven European Platforms (but what are they?) Platform against Poverty (EPAP) Digital divide
Lisbon and Europe 2020 compared: some progress for Social Europe Window of opportunity: can still be seized But let us beware what we wish for there is not only a keep moving sign for social Europe
III. Risks in relation to Europe 2020 1. No room for complacency Pursuing the wrong paradigm growth, growth, growth (instead of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth) First EC Annual Growth Survey where is the social dimension Criticism (repeat some of Lisbon s flaws): supply-side measures; market-based understanding of growth absence of an optimal policy-mix (e.g. no stricter wage coordination in Europe; no mechanisms to balance external economic asymmetries) Lack of qualitative considerations ( decent work )
2. Social Dimension subsumed into economic objectives Innovation and social progress tied to fulfillment of debt criteria tunnel vision, even IMF/Lagarde agrees! Close link NRPs and Stability and Convergence Programmes Synchronisation: read together Cyprus NRP 6 May 2011 Cyprus Stability Programme 7 may 2011
Europe 2020 - Integrated Guidelines Stability and Growth Pact Macro-economic surveillance (Integrated Guidelines 1-3) Thematic coordination (IGs 4-10) Monitored through 5 EU Headline Targets Fiscal Surveillance Spring European Council: Debate and Orientation National Reform Programmes (NRPs) (including national targets) Member States - April (Progress towards headline targets) - March synchronized Stability and Convergence Programmes (SCP) Member States April Policy Guidance (Opinions and Recommendations) European Commission June Debate and Orientation European Parliament and Council of the EU February Annual Growth Survey: Progress and Orientation European Commission January Supported by: EU Flagship Initiatives Single Market Relaunch Trade and External Policies EU Financial Support Finalisation and Adoption of Opinions and Recommendations Council of the EU (ECOFIN and EPSCO) June Endorsment of Opinions and Recommendations European Council June European Semester Domestic Semester Finalisation of National Budgets Policy measures at national level European Semester Domestic Semester
In such a framework Unclear: to what extent will countryspecific Recommendations focus on Social Inclusion (Guideline 10?) And what if (say) Germany of Poland do not set poverty targets, What if Cyprus misses its R&D or educational targets (by far?): Mentioned/stressed in AGS? Policy warning? See first round of NRPs (ECOFIN/EPC)
Questions/Clarifications?
3. Social Protection and Social Inclusion reduced to fighting poverty What about common objectives on pensions and health care? Enter mainly insofar as they contribute to the social exclusion goals Social Inclusion Guideline framed as Employment Guideline (Treaty base) Responsibility for monitoring, implementation?
Risk that social protection and social inclusion may be reduced to social inclusion only with the latter focusing narrowly on increasing access to employment, but not on the outsiders
4. What role for the Social OMC? Governance structure still unfinished Many questions remaining about the future of the Social OMC: Discussion almost finalised in SPC Ad Hoc Group
In sum: Synchronisation (budgetary, macroeconomic and thematic strands) involves serious risks for the Social dimension of Europe See reference to shortcomings of COLA, limited progress on healthcare reform and containing public-sector wages in Cyprus (Council Recommendations 12 July 2011)
Questions/Clarifications?
IV. Where do we go from here? Safeguarding Europe 2020`s Social Dimension 2 possible future scenarios: minimum scenario paradigm shift
Minimum Scenario: Ensuring a role for the social stakeholders (EPSCO, EMCO, SPC) Continue a broad OMC (all 3 strands) Beefing up its instruments (monitoring, horizontal clause) Greater involvement of stakeholders (SP, NGOs, etc.) procedural rules? Financial support (e.g. ESF): conditionality Paradigm Shift: Social Investment Pact (Hemerijck, Palier, Vandenbroucke) Combine short-term fiscal consolidation and longterm social investment in the context of Europe 2020. Objectives: modernise welfare system, invest in people to prepare (capacitate) them for social change and global competition.
Social Investment Pact Embedded in financial regulation. Oriented to the achievement of greater equality. Priorities of social investment: Improvement of human capital as a means for a more competitive Europe Child care and education as a priority Later and more flexible retirement Capacitating orientation of services
V. Conclusion and Outlook Proof of the pudding is in the eating (still early days) New opportunities when compared to the Lisbon Strategy: rather all-encompassing; increased visibility (IG 10, headline target, EPAP) But also serious risks: Dominance of economic considerations (growth objectives and synchronisation); reduction to social inclusion; Social OMC?
Still room for building the Social dimension of Europe 2020 (but difficult!) it s a new-born Strong alliances needed: up to the social actors to create leverage, and to make the best of this oxymoron But HOW?
Making the best of the Oxymoron (or fight it?) Use European Council Conclusions toward Cyprus, e.g. [ ] taking care to address the high at-risk-of-poverty rate for the elderly (Council Recommendations 12 July 2011) Use agreed targets, push for ambitious (sub-)targets, increase monitoring of non-social policies (Lisbon Treaty)
Making the best of the Oxymoron (or fight it?) Use it as a step-up to EU legislation (but political context?) Minimum income would be a first candidate (EAPN, EC tender EC, B Presidency) What about upcoming Cyprus Presidency (procedural rules for stakeholder involvement)? Contribute to critical discourse (picked up: politicians, MEP s, opposition, academics) EAPN report on social dimension of NRP Eurochild report on how child poverty is being addressed Where is Cyprus (22 national contributions)?!
Download our publications, Newsletters and events agenda from www.ose.be (Eng-Fr)
OSE website