"After years of inactivity on social policy legislation and a year ahead of the European parliamentary elections, the Commission wants to make people believe it has learned its lesson from the wake-up call of the French, Dutch and Irish 'No' to the Lisbon Treaty. The truth, however, is: the new 'social package' consists mainly of non-legislative communications, reports and recommendations whose effect in terms of promoting measurable progress towards Social Europe is doubtful. On the legislative front, the main thrust of the Commission's policies continues to be a Europe in which market liberalisation, deregulation and flexible labour are being prioritised first and foremost", said GUE/NGL President Francis Wurtz.
Of the three legislative proposals in the social package, the Directive on the application of 'patients' rights in cross-border health care' is a telling example. Wurtz pointed out: "This proposal is the follow-up to the exclusion of health services from the Services Directive. The new Directive aims at codifying the ECJ case law on patient mobility based on an 'internal market' approach. We think that all the issues addressed here must be solved within the existing framework of the coordination of social security schemes (Regulation 883/2004/EC). There is no need for a new Directive based on an internal market approach to health care. We strongly oppose the re-introduction of 'Bolkestein' through the backdoor."
"The hypocrisy of the European Commission is neatly exposed through its supportive statements on the ECJ rulings in the Viking Line, Laval, Rüffert and Luxemburg cases, which restrict fundamental rights, the right to strike and collective bargaining and also the rights contained in the posting of workers directive", Wurtz added. "In its proposal on priority implementation of ILO conventions, ILO convention No. 94 requiring compliance with collective agreements in public procurement regulation is missing. This is not coincidental - the scandalous Rüffert judgement had ruled that a requirement to comply with collective agreements as part of public procurement obligations violates the EU Directive on the posting of workers. Thus the ECJ judgement directly contradicts one of the ILO conventions, and the Commission does not make any effort to remedy that situation."
"We should not forget what the Commission and the Council have done on the revision of the Working Time Directive. They sell the agreement as establishing a fair balance between flexibility and social security", said Dimitris Papadimoulis (GUE/NGL shadow rapporteur on this dossier). "In fact, this is an overall attack on workers' rights of historical dimensions. The Council Common Position would wipe out the clear ECJ rulings that time spent on-call at the workplace is working time. It would enable Member States to decree annualised working time by simple administrative regulations, allowing for working weeks of 78 hours and a working day of 13 hours. The opt-out would be maintained, allowing for working weeks of 65 and even 78 hours, if covered by collective agreements or national legislation. This is not a 'modern' social agenda, as the Commission claims, but an attempt to turn the wheels of history backwards towards Manchester Capitalism. The EU's concept of flexicurity now is now revealing its real anti-social face."
The Commission proposes the revision of the Directive on European Works Councils (94/45/EC). "The European Parliament had already demanded this revision 7 years ago, in 2001, and the proposal now on the table is weak and disappointing. Core demands contained in Parliaments' report by Wilfried Menrad (PPE-DE) at that time have not been taken on board, especially as regards the strengthening of EWCs' rights on proper information and consultation in due time, especially in relation to take-overs, mergers and restructuring, and a system of sanctions in case of non-compliance", Papadimoulis (GUE/NGL shadow rapporteur) remarked.
Amongst its non-legislative proposals, the Commission highlights the need to strengthen the Open Method of Coordination on Social Inclusion and Social Protection (OMC) and its visibility. "It should be remembered that the European Council only recently rejected demands from Parliament to include a new guideline on fighting poverty and social exclusion when adopting the Employment Guidelines 2008 - 2010. Also the Commission had insisted that the Employment Guidelines 2005 - 2008 should continue unchanged for the new period. This was an explicit stance against improved visibility and policy coordination", said Gabi Zimmer (GUE/NGL rapporteur on social inclusion).
The Commission proposes to adopt targets for the OMC, e.g. on reducing overall poverty and child poverty; reducing in-work poverty, etc. "To propose targets is the right approach, but the Commission fails to provide for any quantitative or qualitative benchmarks. In my draft report on social inclusion for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, one key demand is to set a target to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2012, and also to provide targets on minimum income schemes (providing for at least 60 % of national median equalised income) and on minimum wages (providing for at least 60 % of the respective national or sectoral average wage to avoid in-work poverty). Since the start of the OMC on Social Inclusion in 2001, there has always been strong rhetoric on the need to eradicate poverty. But in real life, poverty has been growing in the EU - from 55 million in 2001 to 78 million in 2005. Therefore, Parliament must give a strong signal to the Commission that quantitative and qualitative targets must be adopted for the next round of the OMC", Zimmer added, "otherwise Member States will continue with their poor commitment to the struggle against poverty and social exclusion."
The Commission proposes a new horizontal directive on anti-discrimination outside employment. "Generally-speaking, this is a long overdue and welcome move. However, we strongly criticise that insurance and other financial products are not to be covered by the Directive, allowing the financial and insurance industry to go on demanding higher contributions because of risks related to health, age, gender and disability. It is unacceptable that the Commission has given in to industry pressure. Discriminatory practices in insurance and financial products must be prohibited by the Directive", said Gabi Zimmer.
GUE/NGL Press
Gianfranco Battistini +32 475 64 66 28
Gay Kavanagh + 32 473 842 320
www.guengl.eu