News
BackThis week, MEPs, scientists and stakeholders discussed the assessment of the current liberalisation measures in respect of public services. Scientists demanded that the experiences of the past 20 years concerning the liberalisation of public services were thoroughly reviewed at last. Previous examinations were not able to cover the various aspects of public services, criticised the researchers.
Prof. David Hall of the University of Greenwich believes that there is little interest to examine the impact of the currently taken liberalisation steps in case of public services. The Member States had made different progress with regard to the liberalisation; hence any evaluation would be a difficult undertaking.
Prof. Hall: public services require thinking beyond economic aspects
Hall sharply criticises the attitude, which some people hold, that there was no alternative to liberalisation. On the contrary, it was necessary to think beyond economic aspects. The criteria for any evaluation had to be determined on this basis. Finally, Hall also points out that in particular “rich countries” would far more invest in public services in proportion to their Gross Domestic Product.
Prof. Thomas Lenk of the University of Leipzig has been looking at public services for years. Many studies, which are concerned with the liberalisation and privatisation of these services in the new Member States, only focus on price and quality. Studies, which look at the old Member States, were more comprehensive, said Lenk. One could see that the markets had changed; however, that did not necessarily mean more competition. Apart from that, one had to ask oneself, what one wanted to achieve with liberalisation, before one would carry out a review.
ETF General Secretary Chagas: young people are not prepared to work under these conditions in the transport sector
Eduardo Chagas, General Secretary of the European Transport Workers' Federation points out that the transport sector was one of the major employers. About 9.2 million people would work in it. He expects that far more jobs will be created in this sector. However, Chagas severely criticises the working conditions: the liberalisation in the transport sector was clearly at the expense of the employees - there were many pseudo self-employed; the contracts would get worse, the employed had to move to another location and social dumping unfortunately would be the order of the day. Some employers in the road and maritime sector would be ruthless. Recently the conditions in air traffic have also been deteriorating. Due to the poor working conditions, many young people were no longer prepared to work in the transport sector said Chagas in his concluding comments.
Employers’ representatives rejoice at the increase of efficiency and passenger numbers
Ludger Sippel and Jan Moellmann of the employer side emphasised the advantages of liberalisation. For example, the Central German DB Regio had sold considerably more tickets since their range had been improved. Moellmann said that 43 % more passengers had used the railway on that route during the past 10 years; the situation was similar in the Netherlands, Sweden and Portugal, where liberalisation had made relatively major progress. Efficiency had increased; it was possible to react far quicker to changes than before. However, a different opinion was voiced by the Head of the Association of German Transport Companies in Brussels: one could see a recommunalisation of public services because liberalisation had not brought the desired effects. Apart from that, many tenders had not been successful because there were no interested parties. He is in favour of practical solutions rather than pursuing ideological demands.
Cornelia Berger, UNI Europa: negative social consequences through liberalisation of the postal sector
Finally the discussion turned to the liberalisation of the postal sector. Nicolas Gelapides of the trade union Sud-PTT referred to the massive job losses in recent years. In Germany, 43,000 employees had lost their job within 5 years; the number in Great Britain had been 77,000 within 10 years. Only a few people were still in full-time employment; the majority would be part-time workers. Cornelia Berger of UNI Europa pointed in particular to the negative social consequences of liberalisation. Fewer employees means more stress for the remaining workforce. However, wages would fall at the same time, criticised Berger. However, Commission studies would ignore these problems and exclusively focus on the economic effects. Most clearly to be seen was the negative impact for employees in Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden; however, overall it would still be too early to assess the social consequences in their entirety, as the liberalisation of the postal sector had only been complete for a few months.
The European Commission had announced some time ago already that it intended to revise the state aid rules for public services. Recently, text drafts on the plans of the Commission have been made available on the internet under http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/sgei.html.
A legislative proposal is intended for 2012.
Prof. Hall: public services require thinking beyond economic aspects
Hall sharply criticises the attitude, which some people hold, that there was no alternative to liberalisation. On the contrary, it was necessary to think beyond economic aspects. The criteria for any evaluation had to be determined on this basis. Finally, Hall also points out that in particular “rich countries” would far more invest in public services in proportion to their Gross Domestic Product.
Prof. Thomas Lenk of the University of Leipzig has been looking at public services for years. Many studies, which are concerned with the liberalisation and privatisation of these services in the new Member States, only focus on price and quality. Studies, which look at the old Member States, were more comprehensive, said Lenk. One could see that the markets had changed; however, that did not necessarily mean more competition. Apart from that, one had to ask oneself, what one wanted to achieve with liberalisation, before one would carry out a review.
ETF General Secretary Chagas: young people are not prepared to work under these conditions in the transport sector
Eduardo Chagas, General Secretary of the European Transport Workers' Federation points out that the transport sector was one of the major employers. About 9.2 million people would work in it. He expects that far more jobs will be created in this sector. However, Chagas severely criticises the working conditions: the liberalisation in the transport sector was clearly at the expense of the employees - there were many pseudo self-employed; the contracts would get worse, the employed had to move to another location and social dumping unfortunately would be the order of the day. Some employers in the road and maritime sector would be ruthless. Recently the conditions in air traffic have also been deteriorating. Due to the poor working conditions, many young people were no longer prepared to work in the transport sector said Chagas in his concluding comments.
Employers’ representatives rejoice at the increase of efficiency and passenger numbers
Ludger Sippel and Jan Moellmann of the employer side emphasised the advantages of liberalisation. For example, the Central German DB Regio had sold considerably more tickets since their range had been improved. Moellmann said that 43 % more passengers had used the railway on that route during the past 10 years; the situation was similar in the Netherlands, Sweden and Portugal, where liberalisation had made relatively major progress. Efficiency had increased; it was possible to react far quicker to changes than before. However, a different opinion was voiced by the Head of the Association of German Transport Companies in Brussels: one could see a recommunalisation of public services because liberalisation had not brought the desired effects. Apart from that, many tenders had not been successful because there were no interested parties. He is in favour of practical solutions rather than pursuing ideological demands.
Cornelia Berger, UNI Europa: negative social consequences through liberalisation of the postal sector
Finally the discussion turned to the liberalisation of the postal sector. Nicolas Gelapides of the trade union Sud-PTT referred to the massive job losses in recent years. In Germany, 43,000 employees had lost their job within 5 years; the number in Great Britain had been 77,000 within 10 years. Only a few people were still in full-time employment; the majority would be part-time workers. Cornelia Berger of UNI Europa pointed in particular to the negative social consequences of liberalisation. Fewer employees means more stress for the remaining workforce. However, wages would fall at the same time, criticised Berger. However, Commission studies would ignore these problems and exclusively focus on the economic effects. Most clearly to be seen was the negative impact for employees in Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden; however, overall it would still be too early to assess the social consequences in their entirety, as the liberalisation of the postal sector had only been complete for a few months.
The European Commission had announced some time ago already that it intended to revise the state aid rules for public services. Recently, text drafts on the plans of the Commission have been made available on the internet under http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/sgei.html.
A legislative proposal is intended for 2012.