News
BackBy introducing competitiveness councils, the EU continues to follow wrong recipes
The economic crisis has made it clear that a common currency also requires stronger economic and political cooperation. Hence, that is why almost a year ago Commission President Juncker together with the Presidents of other major institutions of the eurozone (Euro Summit, Euro Group, ECB and European Parliament) presented a plan on deepening the Economic and Monetary Union. This shall be achieved by implementing for example a European investment protection system and by creating a future treasury for the eurozone. The fundamental idea of the plan is: away from rules towards institutions. A stable and transparent architecture of the Economic and Monetary Union shall be made possible. Unfortunately, little has changed with regard to the fundamental economic understanding of EU institutions. The programme continues to aim for neoliberal structural reforms.
Social dimensions in the crisis were completely neglected
In his opening address, Oliver Röpke, Head of the European Office of the Austrian Trade Union Federation, warned against the centrifugal forces, which are unfolded by the current EU policy. Based on an economic doctrine, which regards rising wages purely as an impediment to competition, there would be no future for the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Ronald Janssen shared his concerns: the balance between an economic and social union, as Jacques Delors had envisaged it, had completely tilted during the crisis. Through the EU, wages had reached rock bottom.
Competitiveness councils shall take a close look at wage development
Stefan Körzell demanded an end to the EU-wide race to the bottom. Unfortunately, with regard to its continued austerity policy, the Commission would still orientate itself towards social minimum standards. Particular controversial in this context are the planned, so-called competitiveness councils. By introducing these national supervisory authorities, the Commission plans to promote the implementation of its country-specific recommendations, thereby pushing stronger for neoliberal structural reforms. Initially, the new councils shall be set up on a voluntary basis; however, a mandatory introduction is already held out in prospect. So far, the implementation has failed because of the resistance of some Member States in the Council (among them Austria and Germany). The ÖGB also firmly rejects the plans of the Commission. Wage developments too shall be analysed, whereby wage increases would predominantly be regarded as an impediment to competition. Stefan Körzell also warned against the apparent objectivity of “independent experts”. If the comparable German Council of Economic Experts had had its way, Germany would have no minimum wage but a retirement age of 70 years.
Executive member of the DGB Körzell: only massive investments can create new perspectives
Completely different remedies were needed to push the eurozone forward. “Only a giant investment programme is able to create perspectives again. The Juncker Plan is an important step, but in reality only a drop in the ocean. Similar to the “DGB Marshall Plan”, strong investment activities had to be sustained over a period of 10-15 years. Ronald Janssen added: “The EMU should not only set economic, it must also set social targets. And economic policy must not only devote itself to stability. Democratic institutions such as the Parliaments of the Member States and the social partners need their firm place in the EMU and cannot be replaced by committees of experts.”
Further information: