Cork lawyer and legal blogger Fergus O’Rourke did it! He located the discussion paper I have been looking for these last two days, and pestering the world about. Thank you, Fergus!
Frustratingly, it is (at least now) posted ‘right under our noses’, on the University College Dublin pages, which I searched two days ago, in vain.
Besides having been commended by Senator and Chairman Paschal Donohoe in the Oireachtas Sub-Committee Report, the UCD Dublin discussion paper discusses European scenarios of general EU interest.
Ireland is not the only one with choices to make concerning the future of and in Europe (as I argue in the preceding post regarding the NIC world trends).
UPDATE - Edited 30 November 2008 about 17:25 EET:
The UCD Dublin European Institute 31 page discussion paper Ireland’s Future in Europe – Scenarios and Implications, by Gavin Barrett, Brigid Laffan, Rodney Thom, Daniel C. Thomas, Ben Tonra (12 November 2008).
The link first offered by me was somehow broken. Instead, follow the advice kindly offered by the UCD EIT Director Daniel Thomas.
Go to the homepage of the Institute and scroll down to the bottom of the page. There are links to both the discussion paper and the Oireachtas report:
http://www.ucd.ie/dei
In addition, if you click on the side bar at Working papers, there is an earlier one 08-01 which also addresses the Lisbon Treaty:
Gavin Barrett, Final Impact: The Treaty of Lisbon and the Final Provisions of the Treaty Establishing the European Community and the Treaty on European Union, UCD Dublin European Institute Working Paper 08-1, May 2008.
***
I want to thank Fergus O'Rourke and Daniel Thomas for their help, and I apologise to the people I have troubled with my questions.
Ralf Grahn
Sunday 30 November 2008
Europe: Dismal trends 2025
European security and prosperity 101 or the Why’s of EU reform, courtesy of the United States of America.
This is what the European leaders have failed to grasp, to agree on or at least to communicate. It is also the reason why the anti-EU campaigners are completely wrong and why the euroscepticism or indifference of large segments of EU citizens is contributing to our declining prospects.
The US National Intelligence Council (NIC) report Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (November 2008) speaks plainly about the problems facing Europe (page 32 to 33). This is the opening paragraph on Europe:
“Europe: Losing Clout in 2025. We believe Europe by 2025 will have made slow progress toward achieving the vision of current leaders and elites: a cohesive, integrated, and influential global actor able to employ independently a full spectrum of political, economic, and military tools in support of European and Western interests and universal ideals. The European Union would need to resolve a perceived democracy gap dividing Brussels from European voters and move past the protracted debate about its institutional structures.”
***
Comment
I agree that the European Union needs to become a cohesive, integrated, and influential global actor able to employ independently a full spectrum of political, economic, and military tools in support of European and Western interests and universal ideals.
I also agree that this is the rhetorical aim of a fair number of the current European leaders and elites. But in the real world the expanded European Union has become even more unwieldy and weak where it matters.
What used to be the “French paradox” – willing the results without willing the means – has become the general state of affairs in an increasingly intergovernmentalist European Union.
The greatness of the US Constitution and the explanatory Federalist Papers lies in the (rough) correspondence between the objectives and the means.
Time and again, the national European leaders have baulked at giving the European Community (European Union) the means to enhance the security and the prosperity of European citizens.
How did our leaders respond to the European Defence Community and the European (Politcal) Community? How did their ‘vision’ manifest itself, when they received the Spinelli draft Constitution? How did they act at the European Convention and during the preceding and subsequent intergovernmental conferences?
Instead of real powers, where they count, the national political leaders have sought to preserve their own playing-grounds while tinkering with institutional EU reform. They have shown every sign of wanting to put the protracted debate about EU institutional structures behind them, if they manage to get the Lisbon Treaty into force, but the Treaty of Lisbon falls glaringly short of making the European Union a coherent world player.
The current treaties and the Lisbon Treaty are the European Articles of Confederation, not only with regard to the insufficient powers, but because of the lack of democratic legitimacy.
The problem is graver than a ‘perceived democracy gap’. The so called double legitimacy of the European Union, primarily founded on member states, but with sops to the citizens, is artificial.
Real powers require real democracy. It is as simple as that.
Naturally, we can continue to debate whether the national leaders in Europe have failed to grasp the obvious, or if their efforts to communicate their European vision have fallen flat, or if their overriding concern is to preserve their own prerogatives.
The existing EU reform treaties, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty are what the European national leaders have managed to agree on and the ‘vision’ they have communicated. These are the facts on which we as citizens can judge.
In my view, the NIC report ascribes to the current European leaders and elites a vision they simply do not have.
The fact remains: Only profound reform can arrest and reverse the decline of the European Union in world affairs.
There is no room for the unanimity rule – the liberum veto – if we EU citizens as a whole want safety and prosperity in the 21st century.
We need a European Union based on its citizens, an elected European Parliament with general powers and a politically accountable executive.
I invite the current European leaders and elites to communicate and to enact this vision.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
US National Intelligence Council (NIC):
Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (November 2008)
http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf
This is what the European leaders have failed to grasp, to agree on or at least to communicate. It is also the reason why the anti-EU campaigners are completely wrong and why the euroscepticism or indifference of large segments of EU citizens is contributing to our declining prospects.
The US National Intelligence Council (NIC) report Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (November 2008) speaks plainly about the problems facing Europe (page 32 to 33). This is the opening paragraph on Europe:
“Europe: Losing Clout in 2025. We believe Europe by 2025 will have made slow progress toward achieving the vision of current leaders and elites: a cohesive, integrated, and influential global actor able to employ independently a full spectrum of political, economic, and military tools in support of European and Western interests and universal ideals. The European Union would need to resolve a perceived democracy gap dividing Brussels from European voters and move past the protracted debate about its institutional structures.”
***
Comment
I agree that the European Union needs to become a cohesive, integrated, and influential global actor able to employ independently a full spectrum of political, economic, and military tools in support of European and Western interests and universal ideals.
I also agree that this is the rhetorical aim of a fair number of the current European leaders and elites. But in the real world the expanded European Union has become even more unwieldy and weak where it matters.
What used to be the “French paradox” – willing the results without willing the means – has become the general state of affairs in an increasingly intergovernmentalist European Union.
The greatness of the US Constitution and the explanatory Federalist Papers lies in the (rough) correspondence between the objectives and the means.
Time and again, the national European leaders have baulked at giving the European Community (European Union) the means to enhance the security and the prosperity of European citizens.
How did our leaders respond to the European Defence Community and the European (Politcal) Community? How did their ‘vision’ manifest itself, when they received the Spinelli draft Constitution? How did they act at the European Convention and during the preceding and subsequent intergovernmental conferences?
Instead of real powers, where they count, the national political leaders have sought to preserve their own playing-grounds while tinkering with institutional EU reform. They have shown every sign of wanting to put the protracted debate about EU institutional structures behind them, if they manage to get the Lisbon Treaty into force, but the Treaty of Lisbon falls glaringly short of making the European Union a coherent world player.
The current treaties and the Lisbon Treaty are the European Articles of Confederation, not only with regard to the insufficient powers, but because of the lack of democratic legitimacy.
The problem is graver than a ‘perceived democracy gap’. The so called double legitimacy of the European Union, primarily founded on member states, but with sops to the citizens, is artificial.
Real powers require real democracy. It is as simple as that.
Naturally, we can continue to debate whether the national leaders in Europe have failed to grasp the obvious, or if their efforts to communicate their European vision have fallen flat, or if their overriding concern is to preserve their own prerogatives.
The existing EU reform treaties, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty are what the European national leaders have managed to agree on and the ‘vision’ they have communicated. These are the facts on which we as citizens can judge.
In my view, the NIC report ascribes to the current European leaders and elites a vision they simply do not have.
The fact remains: Only profound reform can arrest and reverse the decline of the European Union in world affairs.
There is no room for the unanimity rule – the liberum veto – if we EU citizens as a whole want safety and prosperity in the 21st century.
We need a European Union based on its citizens, an elected European Parliament with general powers and a politically accountable executive.
I invite the current European leaders and elites to communicate and to enact this vision.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
US National Intelligence Council (NIC):
Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (November 2008)
http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf
Saturday 29 November 2008
Ireland in Europe: Where is the UCD discussion paper?
The Houses of the Oireachtas, Sub-Committee on Ireland’s Future in the European Union report ‘Ireland’s future in the European Union: Challenges, Issues and Options’ (published 27 November 2008) has led to a spat.
The ‘no’ side accuses the Sub-Committee of not representing the ‘no’ side fairly and of drawing on expert work prepared by the University College Dublin European Institute, said to be pro-EU.
In the foreword Committee Chairman Paschal Donohoe gives tribute to the discussion paper:
“I also wish to thank UCD’s Dublin European Institute for their discussion paper, which made an invaluable contribution to the Sub-Committee’s work.”
Naturally, any political minority is free to accuse the majority of availing itself of expert work, as you can see in today’s Irish newspapers (Irish Times and Irish Independent).
But outside Ireland the reasoning of the UCD European Institute might be of interest due to the contents of the contribution, more than for reasons of partisan bickering.
Since the Lisbon Treaty has been approved by 25 national parliaments, there is great European interest in Ireland’s future role in Europe.
***
Help!?
Yesterday and today I have tried in vain to find the European Institute’s discussion paper on the web (and the published Oireachtas report does not include the Annexes mentioned in the Contents).
Since this blog has a number of Irish readers, I turn to them with a question: Can you locate the UCD European Institute’s discussion paper on Ireland’s future in Europe for me and my readers?
Information would be gratefully received, since it would complement the materials mentioned in yesterday’s blog post ‘Ireland and Lisbon Treaty’ as well as earlier entries.
Ralf Grahn
The ‘no’ side accuses the Sub-Committee of not representing the ‘no’ side fairly and of drawing on expert work prepared by the University College Dublin European Institute, said to be pro-EU.
In the foreword Committee Chairman Paschal Donohoe gives tribute to the discussion paper:
“I also wish to thank UCD’s Dublin European Institute for their discussion paper, which made an invaluable contribution to the Sub-Committee’s work.”
Naturally, any political minority is free to accuse the majority of availing itself of expert work, as you can see in today’s Irish newspapers (Irish Times and Irish Independent).
But outside Ireland the reasoning of the UCD European Institute might be of interest due to the contents of the contribution, more than for reasons of partisan bickering.
Since the Lisbon Treaty has been approved by 25 national parliaments, there is great European interest in Ireland’s future role in Europe.
***
Help!?
Yesterday and today I have tried in vain to find the European Institute’s discussion paper on the web (and the published Oireachtas report does not include the Annexes mentioned in the Contents).
Since this blog has a number of Irish readers, I turn to them with a question: Can you locate the UCD European Institute’s discussion paper on Ireland’s future in Europe for me and my readers?
Information would be gratefully received, since it would complement the materials mentioned in yesterday’s blog post ‘Ireland and Lisbon Treaty’ as well as earlier entries.
Ralf Grahn
European Union: Employment Committee
The treaty based advisory Employment Committee promotes coordination between EC (EU) member states on employment and labour market policies.
Does ‘management and labour’ have a specific meaning in this context? Often used in Eurojargon, but what are the social partners?
***
Current TEC
The headline of this post starts with ‘European Union’, which can be defended if you look at the EU as a Greek Temple, with three pillars. More exactly, the subject matter belongs to the Community pillar (first pillar), but few readers seem to be that exact in their web searches. The term ‘European Community’ seems to have fallen into disuse, save for official documents and a few brave lawyers. I try to use the EU and the EC terms in a pragmatic manner, depending on the context.
The current Article 130 (ex Article 109s) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) concludes the Title VIII Employment by establishing a sector committee.
The Employment Committee works in an advisory capacity.
Whereas most of the Employment Title speaks about employment (policies) or refers to the employment aims, Article 130 TEC picks up the term ‘labour markets’ mentioned in Article 125 TEC.
The Employment Committee promotes coordination between member states on employment and labour market policies.
The Employment Committee consults management and labour, known as the social partners in Eurospeak.
There is the customary proviso that the Employment Committee works ‘without prejudice to Article 207’, referring to the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States (Coreper), the last stop before the Ministers meet in the Council.
The intergovernmental nature of the Employment Committee is illustrated not only by the wording that it is established to ‘promote coordination between Member States’ or by the fact that the Committee is appointed by the Council, but also by the preponderance of member states’ representatives. Each member state appoints two members (as does the Commission).
The existing Article 130 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/103):
Article 130 TEC
The Council, after consulting the European Parliament, shall establish an Employment Committee with advisory status to promote coordination between Member States on employment and labour market policies. The tasks of the Committee shall be:
— to monitor the employment situation and employment policies in the Member States and the Community,
— without prejudice to Article 207, to formulate opinions at the request of either the Council or the Commission or on its own initiative, and to contribute to the preparation of the Council proceedings referred to in Article 128.
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Each Member State and the Commission shall appoint two members of the Committee.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty (ToL)
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force. Agreed and signed between 27 member state governments, it has by now been approved by the national parliaments in 25 member states ahead of the original target date for entry into force (1 January 2009). Among the parliamentary ratifiers, only the holder of the next Council Presidency, the Czech Republic, looks certain to miss the agreed target date.
In addition, Ireland is pondering its European future following the negative outcome of the 12 June 2008 referendum. (For some updated references to the Irish debate, you can read yesterday’s post ‘Ireland and Lisbon Treaty’.)
Anyway, in some instances the Lisbon Treaty is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
On the other hand, the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
The changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 130 TEC the word ‘Community’ is replaced by ‘Union’, as elsewhere in the Treaty of Lisbon. Another horizontal amendment is that the clarifying words ‘acting by a simple majority’ are inserted after ‘The Council’ according to Article 2, point 4 ToL, but the procedure remains the same.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 130 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 150 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 150 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 130 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/113, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 150 TFEU
(ex Article 130 TEC)
The Council, acting by a simple majority after consulting the European Parliament, shall establish an Employment Committee with advisory status to promote coordination between Member States on employment and labour market policies. The tasks of the Committee shall be:
— to monitor the employment situation and employment policies in the Member States and the Union,
— without prejudice to Article 240, to formulate opinions at the request of either the Council or the Commission or on its own initiative, and to contribute to the preparation of the Council proceedings referred to in Article 148.
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Each Member State and the Commission shall appoint two members of the Committee.
***
Management and labour
The English version of the treaties refers to consulting ‘management and labour’. We look at the wording of the sentence, first in English:
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Management and labour seem to be given more exact contours, when we turn to the German version:
Bei der Erfüllung seines Auftrags hört der Ausschuss die Sozialpartner.
The French words, likewise, gives management and labour a more precise meaning than the English treaty text:
Dans l'accomplissement de son mandat, le comité consulte les partenaires sociaux.
The Sapnish treaty text catches another nuance of the parties or partners to be consulted:
Para llevar a cabo su mandato, el Comité deberá consultar a los interlocutores sociales.
The Finnish treaty text uses (almost) the same terminology as the German and the French, although the customary term evokes contracting parties (collective agreements) as much as partners in a dialogue:
Tehtäväänsä toteuttaessaan komitea kuulee työmarkkinaosapuolia.
The Swedish text uses the term ’arbetsmarknadens parter’ identical with the Finnish concept:
Kommittén ska när den utför sitt uppdrag höra arbetsmarknadens parter.
We can conclude that the drafters of the treaties have had organised employers and organised labour in mind and that national systems of collective bargaining and traditions of dialogue between management and employee interests are reflected in the various terms used. Anyway, the English version seems to be less exact than the other language versions. (The Title Social policy is imbued with references to the social partners.)
The subparagraph does not specify the level of consultations, which means that the wording does not exclude consultations at European or national level.
***
Social partners
The Europa Glossary outlines the meaning of ‘social partners’ in the following way (although it leans heavily on Article 138 TEC, in the current Title XI Social policy, education, vocational training and youth):
Social partners
The glossary is being updated given the recent signing of the Treaty of Lisbon.
The Commission is required to consult various social partners when it wishes to submit proposals in this field (article 138 of the EC Treaty). This social dialogue occurs via the three main cross-industry organisations representing the social partners at European level:
the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC);
the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe (BUSINESSEUROPE);
the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation (CEEP).
In addition to these three European cross-industry organisations, there are many other socio-professional groups representing specific or sectoral interests.
It is the Commission's task to promote consultation of the social partners and take any relevant measures to facilitate their dialogue by ensuring balanced support for the parties.
Before submitting proposals in the field of social policy, the Commission consults the social partners on the possible direction of EU action.
The social partners also play an important role in the European Economic and Social Committee, where they sit alongside other representatives of civil society.
***
Employment Committee – Council decision
Not to forget secondary legislation, the Committee was established by the Council decision of 24 January 2000 establishing the Employment Committee (OJ 4.2.2000 L 29/21).
The decision reiterates the treaty provisions, but adds some specifications to the Committee’s tasks.
***
Employment Committee activity
The European Commission, Employment and Social Affairs, offers an introductory web page on the Employment Committee with links to its activities:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/emco_en.htm
Ralf Grahn
Does ‘management and labour’ have a specific meaning in this context? Often used in Eurojargon, but what are the social partners?
***
Current TEC
The headline of this post starts with ‘European Union’, which can be defended if you look at the EU as a Greek Temple, with three pillars. More exactly, the subject matter belongs to the Community pillar (first pillar), but few readers seem to be that exact in their web searches. The term ‘European Community’ seems to have fallen into disuse, save for official documents and a few brave lawyers. I try to use the EU and the EC terms in a pragmatic manner, depending on the context.
The current Article 130 (ex Article 109s) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) concludes the Title VIII Employment by establishing a sector committee.
The Employment Committee works in an advisory capacity.
Whereas most of the Employment Title speaks about employment (policies) or refers to the employment aims, Article 130 TEC picks up the term ‘labour markets’ mentioned in Article 125 TEC.
The Employment Committee promotes coordination between member states on employment and labour market policies.
The Employment Committee consults management and labour, known as the social partners in Eurospeak.
There is the customary proviso that the Employment Committee works ‘without prejudice to Article 207’, referring to the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States (Coreper), the last stop before the Ministers meet in the Council.
The intergovernmental nature of the Employment Committee is illustrated not only by the wording that it is established to ‘promote coordination between Member States’ or by the fact that the Committee is appointed by the Council, but also by the preponderance of member states’ representatives. Each member state appoints two members (as does the Commission).
The existing Article 130 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/103):
Article 130 TEC
The Council, after consulting the European Parliament, shall establish an Employment Committee with advisory status to promote coordination between Member States on employment and labour market policies. The tasks of the Committee shall be:
— to monitor the employment situation and employment policies in the Member States and the Community,
— without prejudice to Article 207, to formulate opinions at the request of either the Council or the Commission or on its own initiative, and to contribute to the preparation of the Council proceedings referred to in Article 128.
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Each Member State and the Commission shall appoint two members of the Committee.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty (ToL)
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force. Agreed and signed between 27 member state governments, it has by now been approved by the national parliaments in 25 member states ahead of the original target date for entry into force (1 January 2009). Among the parliamentary ratifiers, only the holder of the next Council Presidency, the Czech Republic, looks certain to miss the agreed target date.
In addition, Ireland is pondering its European future following the negative outcome of the 12 June 2008 referendum. (For some updated references to the Irish debate, you can read yesterday’s post ‘Ireland and Lisbon Treaty’.)
Anyway, in some instances the Lisbon Treaty is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
On the other hand, the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
The changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 130 TEC the word ‘Community’ is replaced by ‘Union’, as elsewhere in the Treaty of Lisbon. Another horizontal amendment is that the clarifying words ‘acting by a simple majority’ are inserted after ‘The Council’ according to Article 2, point 4 ToL, but the procedure remains the same.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 130 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 150 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 150 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 130 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/113, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 150 TFEU
(ex Article 130 TEC)
The Council, acting by a simple majority after consulting the European Parliament, shall establish an Employment Committee with advisory status to promote coordination between Member States on employment and labour market policies. The tasks of the Committee shall be:
— to monitor the employment situation and employment policies in the Member States and the Union,
— without prejudice to Article 240, to formulate opinions at the request of either the Council or the Commission or on its own initiative, and to contribute to the preparation of the Council proceedings referred to in Article 148.
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Each Member State and the Commission shall appoint two members of the Committee.
***
Management and labour
The English version of the treaties refers to consulting ‘management and labour’. We look at the wording of the sentence, first in English:
In fulfilling its mandate, the Committee shall consult management and labour.
Management and labour seem to be given more exact contours, when we turn to the German version:
Bei der Erfüllung seines Auftrags hört der Ausschuss die Sozialpartner.
The French words, likewise, gives management and labour a more precise meaning than the English treaty text:
Dans l'accomplissement de son mandat, le comité consulte les partenaires sociaux.
The Sapnish treaty text catches another nuance of the parties or partners to be consulted:
Para llevar a cabo su mandato, el Comité deberá consultar a los interlocutores sociales.
The Finnish treaty text uses (almost) the same terminology as the German and the French, although the customary term evokes contracting parties (collective agreements) as much as partners in a dialogue:
Tehtäväänsä toteuttaessaan komitea kuulee työmarkkinaosapuolia.
The Swedish text uses the term ’arbetsmarknadens parter’ identical with the Finnish concept:
Kommittén ska när den utför sitt uppdrag höra arbetsmarknadens parter.
We can conclude that the drafters of the treaties have had organised employers and organised labour in mind and that national systems of collective bargaining and traditions of dialogue between management and employee interests are reflected in the various terms used. Anyway, the English version seems to be less exact than the other language versions. (The Title Social policy is imbued with references to the social partners.)
The subparagraph does not specify the level of consultations, which means that the wording does not exclude consultations at European or national level.
***
Social partners
The Europa Glossary outlines the meaning of ‘social partners’ in the following way (although it leans heavily on Article 138 TEC, in the current Title XI Social policy, education, vocational training and youth):
Social partners
The glossary is being updated given the recent signing of the Treaty of Lisbon.
The Commission is required to consult various social partners when it wishes to submit proposals in this field (article 138 of the EC Treaty). This social dialogue occurs via the three main cross-industry organisations representing the social partners at European level:
the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC);
the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe (BUSINESSEUROPE);
the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation (CEEP).
In addition to these three European cross-industry organisations, there are many other socio-professional groups representing specific or sectoral interests.
It is the Commission's task to promote consultation of the social partners and take any relevant measures to facilitate their dialogue by ensuring balanced support for the parties.
Before submitting proposals in the field of social policy, the Commission consults the social partners on the possible direction of EU action.
The social partners also play an important role in the European Economic and Social Committee, where they sit alongside other representatives of civil society.
***
Employment Committee – Council decision
Not to forget secondary legislation, the Committee was established by the Council decision of 24 January 2000 establishing the Employment Committee (OJ 4.2.2000 L 29/21).
The decision reiterates the treaty provisions, but adds some specifications to the Committee’s tasks.
***
Employment Committee activity
The European Commission, Employment and Social Affairs, offers an introductory web page on the Employment Committee with links to its activities:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/emco_en.htm
Ralf Grahn
Friday 28 November 2008
Ireland and Lisbon Treaty
In Ireland the Government, the Parliament and the expert community have been busy at work trying to find a solution to the Lisbon Treaty predicament.
Declan Ganley is as busy trying to kill the Lisbon Treaty, which by now has been approved by 25 EU member states’ parliaments.
***
Government
Ahead of the December European Council, the Irish Government is now close to internal agreement on how to proceed with the Lisbon Treaty, reports Deaglán de Bréadún in the Irish Times (28 November 2008): Government to seek ‘binding declarations’ in Lisbon rerun. See:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1128/1227825379933.html
***
Parliament
Yesterday, 27 November 2008, the Lisbon Treaty subcommittee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee European Affairs issued its report Ireland’s future in the European Union: Challenges, Issues and Options.
The intention is to hold a parliamentary debate before the European Council in December.
The subcommittee wants to strike a balance between keeping Ireland at the heart of Europe and respecting the democratic will of the Irish people, by extracting concessions from the other EU member states.
The Irish Parliament’s report is available at (Word document):
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=10475
For a condensed view of the matter, see Deaglán de Bréadún’s article Oireachtas group says main option is amended treaty (Irish Times, 28 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1128/1227825379896.html?via=rel
***
Expert community
About two weeks before this, on 14 November 2008, the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland) published its report: Ireland’s Future after Lisbon – Issues, Options, Implications.
The IIEA’s report is downloadable at:
http://www.iiea.com/publicationxtest.php?publication_id=38
***
Declan Ganley
Declan Ganley, the founder of anti-Lisbon campaign group Libertas, said that the only action that would cause him to rethink launching Libertas on the EU stage was if Taoiseach Brian Cowen told fellow EU leaders next month Lisbon was dead.
Source:
Jamie Smyth: Ganley’s Brussels office opens for business (Irish Times, 27 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/1127/1227739034156.html
Libertas tries to qualify for public campaign contributions at European level.
Jamie Smyth: Libertas applies for European political party funds (Irish Times, 27 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/1127/1227739034172.html
Ralf Grahn
Declan Ganley is as busy trying to kill the Lisbon Treaty, which by now has been approved by 25 EU member states’ parliaments.
***
Government
Ahead of the December European Council, the Irish Government is now close to internal agreement on how to proceed with the Lisbon Treaty, reports Deaglán de Bréadún in the Irish Times (28 November 2008): Government to seek ‘binding declarations’ in Lisbon rerun. See:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1128/1227825379933.html
***
Parliament
Yesterday, 27 November 2008, the Lisbon Treaty subcommittee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee European Affairs issued its report Ireland’s future in the European Union: Challenges, Issues and Options.
The intention is to hold a parliamentary debate before the European Council in December.
The subcommittee wants to strike a balance between keeping Ireland at the heart of Europe and respecting the democratic will of the Irish people, by extracting concessions from the other EU member states.
The Irish Parliament’s report is available at (Word document):
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=10475
For a condensed view of the matter, see Deaglán de Bréadún’s article Oireachtas group says main option is amended treaty (Irish Times, 28 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1128/1227825379896.html?via=rel
***
Expert community
About two weeks before this, on 14 November 2008, the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland) published its report: Ireland’s Future after Lisbon – Issues, Options, Implications.
The IIEA’s report is downloadable at:
http://www.iiea.com/publicationxtest.php?publication_id=38
***
Declan Ganley
Declan Ganley, the founder of anti-Lisbon campaign group Libertas, said that the only action that would cause him to rethink launching Libertas on the EU stage was if Taoiseach Brian Cowen told fellow EU leaders next month Lisbon was dead.
Source:
Jamie Smyth: Ganley’s Brussels office opens for business (Irish Times, 27 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/1127/1227739034156.html
Libertas tries to qualify for public campaign contributions at European level.
Jamie Smyth: Libertas applies for European political party funds (Irish Times, 27 November 2008):
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/1127/1227739034172.html
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
EU,
European Union,
Ireland,
Lisbon Treaty,
ratification
EU employment: Incentive measures and pilot projects
Even if there is no independent European Community (European Union) employment policy, the Treaty establishing the European Community offers the EC (EU) some scope for supporting action, labeled as incentive measures.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 129 (ex Article 109r) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, offers the Community some scope of action in the area of employment policy.
Harmonisation of member states’ laws and regulations is excluded out of hand (paragraph 2).
Using the co-decision procedure, the Council may adopt incentive measures.
The incentive measures are ancillary to the employment policies of the member states: designed to encourage cooperation between member states and to support their action.
This supporting role is underlined by the description of allowed actions, such as promoting exchange of information and best practices, offering analysis and advice and through experimental pilot projects.
The existing Article 129 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/103):
Article 129 TEC
The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, may adopt incentive measures designed to encourage cooperation between Member States and to support their action in the field of employment through initiatives aimed at developing exchanges of information and best practices, providing comparative analysis and advice as well as promoting innovative approaches and evaluating experiences, in particular by recourse to pilot projects.
Those measures shall not include harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in some instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
On the other hand, the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
The changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 129 TEC, as in a number of provisions, ‘the procedure referred to in Article 251’ (without using the customary term ‘co-decision’) is mercifully renamed ‘the ordinary legislative procedure’, which means that the European Parliament is named as co-legislator.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 129 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 149 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 149 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 129 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/113, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 149 TFEU
(ex Article 129 TEC)
The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, may adopt incentive measures designed to encourage cooperation between Member States and to support their action in the field of employment through initiatives aimed at developing exchanges of information and best practices, providing comparative analysis and advice as well as promoting innovative approaches and evaluating experiences, in particular by recourse to pilot projects.
Those measures shall not include harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States.
***
Incentive measures and pilot projects
Incentive measures and pilot projects are key terms, but it is not easy to find clear definitions of them. The terms have to be interpreted in the context of each treaty Article where they appear.
The pragmatic solution is to look at what the European Community (European Union) has seen fit to approve through legal acts and budget decisions in each policy area, in this case the employment area.
The European Commission's Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities offers information on its activities:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=23&langId=en
Incentive measures (examples)
In addition to Article 149 TFEU presented above, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union mentions incentive measures in a few other policy areas where the EU’s powers are weak.
Article 19(1) TFEU (Article 13 TEC) mentions action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (requiring unanimous Council decision). But adopting the basic principles of Union incentive measures to support
action taken by the Member States in order to contribute to the achievement of these objectives is possible through the ordinary legislative procedure, pursuant to Article 19(2) TFEU.
Article 165 TFEU (Article 149 TEC) concerns education and sporting issues, where the fourth paragraph allows the adoption of incentive measures, as always with the proviso ‘excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States’.
The European Union’s contribution to the flowering of the cultures of the member states includes the option to use incentive measures, in Article 167 TFEU (Article 151 TEC).
Incentive measures may also be adopted, if they are designed to protect and improve human health and in particular to combat the major cross-border health scourges, measures concerning monitoring, early warning of and combating serious cross-border threats to health, and measures which have as their direct objective the protection of public health regarding tobacco and the abuse of alcohol, according to Article 168 TFEU (Article 152 TEC).
***
Pilot projects
Article 149 seems to be the only TFEU provision employing the term pilot project.
The Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (OJ 14.6.2006 C 139) mentions pilot projects in a few instances, without adding much to our understanding of the meaning of the term.
The Commission’s annual draft budget takes into account (c) the possibilities for starting up new policies through pilot projects and/or new preparatory actions or continuing multiannual actions which are coming to an end (point 32).
The Commission’s financial programming identifies for annual actions (pilot projects, preparatory actions, Agencies) and actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission multiannual estimates and (for pilot projects and preparatory actions) the margins left under the authorised ceilings (point 46).
In Annex II (point D) on interinstitutional collaboration both arms of the budgetary authority (the Council and the European Parliament) undertake to inform the Commission by mid-June of their intentions with regard to amendments which create new preparatory actions/pilot projects or prolong existing ones.
***
As a last resort, Article 263 TFEU (Article 230 TEC) lets the Court of Justice of the European Union review the legality of legal acts and other acts of the institutions.
Ralf Grahn
***
Current TEC
The current Article 129 (ex Article 109r) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, offers the Community some scope of action in the area of employment policy.
Harmonisation of member states’ laws and regulations is excluded out of hand (paragraph 2).
Using the co-decision procedure, the Council may adopt incentive measures.
The incentive measures are ancillary to the employment policies of the member states: designed to encourage cooperation between member states and to support their action.
This supporting role is underlined by the description of allowed actions, such as promoting exchange of information and best practices, offering analysis and advice and through experimental pilot projects.
The existing Article 129 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/103):
Article 129 TEC
The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, may adopt incentive measures designed to encourage cooperation between Member States and to support their action in the field of employment through initiatives aimed at developing exchanges of information and best practices, providing comparative analysis and advice as well as promoting innovative approaches and evaluating experiences, in particular by recourse to pilot projects.
Those measures shall not include harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in some instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
On the other hand, the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
The changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 129 TEC, as in a number of provisions, ‘the procedure referred to in Article 251’ (without using the customary term ‘co-decision’) is mercifully renamed ‘the ordinary legislative procedure’, which means that the European Parliament is named as co-legislator.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 129 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 149 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 149 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 129 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/113, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 149 TFEU
(ex Article 129 TEC)
The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, may adopt incentive measures designed to encourage cooperation between Member States and to support their action in the field of employment through initiatives aimed at developing exchanges of information and best practices, providing comparative analysis and advice as well as promoting innovative approaches and evaluating experiences, in particular by recourse to pilot projects.
Those measures shall not include harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States.
***
Incentive measures and pilot projects
Incentive measures and pilot projects are key terms, but it is not easy to find clear definitions of them. The terms have to be interpreted in the context of each treaty Article where they appear.
The pragmatic solution is to look at what the European Community (European Union) has seen fit to approve through legal acts and budget decisions in each policy area, in this case the employment area.
The European Commission's Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities offers information on its activities:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=23&langId=en
Incentive measures (examples)
In addition to Article 149 TFEU presented above, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union mentions incentive measures in a few other policy areas where the EU’s powers are weak.
Article 19(1) TFEU (Article 13 TEC) mentions action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (requiring unanimous Council decision). But adopting the basic principles of Union incentive measures to support
action taken by the Member States in order to contribute to the achievement of these objectives is possible through the ordinary legislative procedure, pursuant to Article 19(2) TFEU.
Article 165 TFEU (Article 149 TEC) concerns education and sporting issues, where the fourth paragraph allows the adoption of incentive measures, as always with the proviso ‘excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States’.
The European Union’s contribution to the flowering of the cultures of the member states includes the option to use incentive measures, in Article 167 TFEU (Article 151 TEC).
Incentive measures may also be adopted, if they are designed to protect and improve human health and in particular to combat the major cross-border health scourges, measures concerning monitoring, early warning of and combating serious cross-border threats to health, and measures which have as their direct objective the protection of public health regarding tobacco and the abuse of alcohol, according to Article 168 TFEU (Article 152 TEC).
***
Pilot projects
Article 149 seems to be the only TFEU provision employing the term pilot project.
The Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (OJ 14.6.2006 C 139) mentions pilot projects in a few instances, without adding much to our understanding of the meaning of the term.
The Commission’s annual draft budget takes into account (c) the possibilities for starting up new policies through pilot projects and/or new preparatory actions or continuing multiannual actions which are coming to an end (point 32).
The Commission’s financial programming identifies for annual actions (pilot projects, preparatory actions, Agencies) and actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission multiannual estimates and (for pilot projects and preparatory actions) the margins left under the authorised ceilings (point 46).
In Annex II (point D) on interinstitutional collaboration both arms of the budgetary authority (the Council and the European Parliament) undertake to inform the Commission by mid-June of their intentions with regard to amendments which create new preparatory actions/pilot projects or prolong existing ones.
***
As a last resort, Article 263 TFEU (Article 230 TEC) lets the Court of Justice of the European Union review the legality of legal acts and other acts of the institutions.
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
EC,
employment,
EU,
EU Law,
European Community,
European Union,
incentive measure,
Lisbon Treaty,
pilot project,
TEC,
TFEU
Thursday 27 November 2008
Statewatch alert: EU Council curbing free movement?
A press release by Statewatch sounds the alarm concerning the very principles the European Community (European Union) is built on. Rolling back free movement of persons endangers a fundamental principle and trying to forestall more open legislative procedures by intergovernmental fiat is a grave procedural choice.
I give you the text of the Statewatch press release with including links for further study:
Press release, 27 November 2008JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS COUNCIL, Brussels, 27 November:Restriction on the EU freedom of movement of citizens who have been convicted of serious crime or for "repeated offences" (which may be "low level")
Ministers are discussing the adoption of Council Conclusions: Free movement of persons: abuses and substantive problems – Draft Council conclusions on abuses and misuses of the right to free movement of persons (16151/1/08, 26 November 2008, pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/nov/eu-restrictions-free-movement-conclusions-nov-08.pdf
These say that: "Only those exercising their rights in the spirit of the Treaty should benefit from freedom of movement." While referring to third country nationals the proposals would apply to EU citizens as well and allow Member States to deny entry to those who:"break the law in a sufficiently serious manner by committing serious and repeated offences
"The scope of "repeated offences" is undefined and could apply, for example, to protestors who take part in cross-border demonstrations.
These Conclusions are based on a proposal put forward by the UK: Statewatch Analysis: The UK proposals on EU free movement law: an attack on the rule of law and EU fundamental freedoms by Professor Steve Peers - University of Essex (pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/analyses/no-72-eu-attack-on-fundamental-rights-08.pdf
The draft conclusions constitute an attack on the rule of law and the fundamental freedom of EU citizens and their family members to move freely within the Community. They indicate an intention to:
- ignore a recent important ruling of the Court of Justice as well as many prior rulings of the Court;
- attempt to dictate to the Court how to interpret EC legislation;
- amend or re-interpret EC legislation at the dictat of interior ministries, without applying any form of legislative process; and
- dictate to the Commission how to perform its independent task as guardian of EC law.
The UK proposal includes considering: "the cumulative damage caused by continuous low-level offending can amount to a sufficiently serious threat to public policy"
United Kingdom delegation: Free movement of persons: abuses and substantive problems - Draft Council Conclusions (EU doc no: 15903/08. 18 November 2008, pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/nov/eu-uk-proposal-on-free-movement-15903-08.pdf
***
Intergovernmental law-making without openness and transparency is once again at work. Swift scrutiny by the European Parliament and national parliaments is called for to safeguard the rights of EU citizens.
Ralf Grahn
I give you the text of the Statewatch press release with including links for further study:
Press release, 27 November 2008JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS COUNCIL, Brussels, 27 November:Restriction on the EU freedom of movement of citizens who have been convicted of serious crime or for "repeated offences" (which may be "low level")
Ministers are discussing the adoption of Council Conclusions: Free movement of persons: abuses and substantive problems – Draft Council conclusions on abuses and misuses of the right to free movement of persons (16151/1/08, 26 November 2008, pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/nov/eu-restrictions-free-movement-conclusions-nov-08.pdf
These say that: "Only those exercising their rights in the spirit of the Treaty should benefit from freedom of movement." While referring to third country nationals the proposals would apply to EU citizens as well and allow Member States to deny entry to those who:"break the law in a sufficiently serious manner by committing serious and repeated offences
"The scope of "repeated offences" is undefined and could apply, for example, to protestors who take part in cross-border demonstrations.
These Conclusions are based on a proposal put forward by the UK: Statewatch Analysis: The UK proposals on EU free movement law: an attack on the rule of law and EU fundamental freedoms by Professor Steve Peers - University of Essex (pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/analyses/no-72-eu-attack-on-fundamental-rights-08.pdf
The draft conclusions constitute an attack on the rule of law and the fundamental freedom of EU citizens and their family members to move freely within the Community. They indicate an intention to:
- ignore a recent important ruling of the Court of Justice as well as many prior rulings of the Court;
- attempt to dictate to the Court how to interpret EC legislation;
- amend or re-interpret EC legislation at the dictat of interior ministries, without applying any form of legislative process; and
- dictate to the Commission how to perform its independent task as guardian of EC law.
The UK proposal includes considering: "the cumulative damage caused by continuous low-level offending can amount to a sufficiently serious threat to public policy"
United Kingdom delegation: Free movement of persons: abuses and substantive problems - Draft Council Conclusions (EU doc no: 15903/08. 18 November 2008, pdf):
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/nov/eu-uk-proposal-on-free-movement-15903-08.pdf
***
Intergovernmental law-making without openness and transparency is once again at work. Swift scrutiny by the European Parliament and national parliaments is called for to safeguard the rights of EU citizens.
Ralf Grahn
EU Lisbon Strategy: National Reform Programmes 2008
The EU member states have prepared new National Reform Programmes (NRPs) in the context of the relaunched Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs. The Employment page I first looked at when writing the previous blog post was not fully up to date, but the Commission has another web page dedicated to these instruments for economic reform and peer review. NRPs may be available in the national language(s) before the translations are published.
***
Commission web page
Under the theme of Growth and Jobs, the European Commission offers links to the updated National Reform Programmes on the web page Action plans and updated National Reform Programmes (2008–2010). Most of the new documents are from October 2008:
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/national-dimension/member-states-2008-2010-reports/index_en.htm
***
Updated National Reform Programmes 2008–2010
The NPRs are usually available in the national language(s), but I looked primarily for English translations which facilitate multilateral learning within the EU framework.
With the help of the Commission web page I found updated NRPs in English from the following EU member states: Austria (47 pages), Bulgaria (28 pages, plus Action Plan 37 pages), the Czech Republic (85 pages), Denmark (117 pages), Estonia (115 pages), Finland (117 pages), France (75 pages), Germany (76 pages), Greece (88 pages), Hungary (169 pages), Ireland (97 pages), Latvia (137 pages), Lithuania (67 pages), Malta (101 pages), Portugal (343 pages), Romania (Report 160 pages plus Action Plan 15 pages), Slovakia (46 pages), Slovenia (130 pages), Spain (225 pages), the Netherlands (76 pages), Sweden (128 pages) and the United Kingdom (44 pages).
***
Belgium
Although the Commission web page had links to the French and Dutch versions of the NPR of Belgium, and English translation is available.
Belgium’s Lisbon Strategy National Reform Programme 2008–2010 (October 2008; 142 pages) is available at:
http://www.be2010.eu/admin/uploaded/200811051451510.NRP2008_ENweb.pdf
***
Other languages
German: Of the more commonly used EU languages, both Austria’s and Germany’s NPRs are naturally available in German.
In Italian: The NPR of Italy (98 pages) seems to be available only in Italian.
French: The Luxembourg (67 pages) seems to be available only in French. Naturally, Belgium and France present French versions.
Dutch: Both Belgium and the Netherlands have NPRs in Dutch.
***
Quantity and quality?
The programmes follow common basic patterns, but the weighting between reporting elements and plans for new reforms vary. The number of pages is not an indication of quality of actions taken or planned, but a quantitative measure of the formidable reading task ahead of Community and ministry officials, who want to mine the documents for good ideas.
***
Missing National Reform Programmes?
I failed to find updated NPRs from Cyprus and from Poland.
Perhaps one of our readers has additional information.
***
Open coordination
The Lisbon Strategy (including the employment aims) is an example of the open method of coordination. The intensive contacts within the European Union make it into the world’s largest learning organisation.
Hopefully, this bodes better for the second half of the Lisbon Strategy and for the post-Lisbon reform strategy, than it did during the first five years from 2000.
Ralf Grahn
***
Commission web page
Under the theme of Growth and Jobs, the European Commission offers links to the updated National Reform Programmes on the web page Action plans and updated National Reform Programmes (2008–2010). Most of the new documents are from October 2008:
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/national-dimension/member-states-2008-2010-reports/index_en.htm
***
Updated National Reform Programmes 2008–2010
The NPRs are usually available in the national language(s), but I looked primarily for English translations which facilitate multilateral learning within the EU framework.
With the help of the Commission web page I found updated NRPs in English from the following EU member states: Austria (47 pages), Bulgaria (28 pages, plus Action Plan 37 pages), the Czech Republic (85 pages), Denmark (117 pages), Estonia (115 pages), Finland (117 pages), France (75 pages), Germany (76 pages), Greece (88 pages), Hungary (169 pages), Ireland (97 pages), Latvia (137 pages), Lithuania (67 pages), Malta (101 pages), Portugal (343 pages), Romania (Report 160 pages plus Action Plan 15 pages), Slovakia (46 pages), Slovenia (130 pages), Spain (225 pages), the Netherlands (76 pages), Sweden (128 pages) and the United Kingdom (44 pages).
***
Belgium
Although the Commission web page had links to the French and Dutch versions of the NPR of Belgium, and English translation is available.
Belgium’s Lisbon Strategy National Reform Programme 2008–2010 (October 2008; 142 pages) is available at:
http://www.be2010.eu/admin/uploaded/200811051451510.NRP2008_ENweb.pdf
***
Other languages
German: Of the more commonly used EU languages, both Austria’s and Germany’s NPRs are naturally available in German.
In Italian: The NPR of Italy (98 pages) seems to be available only in Italian.
French: The Luxembourg (67 pages) seems to be available only in French. Naturally, Belgium and France present French versions.
Dutch: Both Belgium and the Netherlands have NPRs in Dutch.
***
Quantity and quality?
The programmes follow common basic patterns, but the weighting between reporting elements and plans for new reforms vary. The number of pages is not an indication of quality of actions taken or planned, but a quantitative measure of the formidable reading task ahead of Community and ministry officials, who want to mine the documents for good ideas.
***
Missing National Reform Programmes?
I failed to find updated NPRs from Cyprus and from Poland.
Perhaps one of our readers has additional information.
***
Open coordination
The Lisbon Strategy (including the employment aims) is an example of the open method of coordination. The intensive contacts within the European Union make it into the world’s largest learning organisation.
Hopefully, this bodes better for the second half of the Lisbon Strategy and for the post-Lisbon reform strategy, than it did during the first five years from 2000.
Ralf Grahn
EU employment: Policy coordination and guidelines
The economic recession and the financial crisis threaten the EC (EU) goal of a high level of employment. The focus has shifted from the more or less coordinated national financial rescue packages to efforts to act coherently in the face of the downturn. How European is the response going to be and how much substance will it have?
At the treaty level there are fairly well-oiled procedures in place for the coordination of economic policies and employment policies, but how will the routines adapt to the deteriorating situation?
The European Council and the Council are the main European Union level players coordinating member states’ employment policies. Soft instruments – conclusions, guidelines, recommendations and reports – are used. The member states prepare national plans and annual employment reports. The Commission acts mainly in a supporting role, collating and cajoling.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 128 (ex Article 109q) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, sets out the choreography for the coordination of member states’ employment policies.
At the summit of these intergovernmental proceedings is the annual spring (March) European Council, dedicated to economic policy and reform issues. The European Council adopts conclusions based on a joint report by the Council and the Commission.
The Council then, after consultations, draws up employment guidelines consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines (BPEGs) for the member states.
Each member state presents an annual report on implementation.
The national reports are examined by the Council, which may make recommendations to the member state.
The Council and the Commission prepare a joint report on the employment situation and the implementation of the employment guidelines.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102–103):
Article 128 TEC
1. The European Council shall each year consider the employment situation in the Community and adopt conclusions thereon, on the basis of a joint annual report by the Council and the Commission.
2. On the basis of the conclusions of the European Council, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee referred to in Article 130, shall each year draw up guidelines which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies. These guidelines shall be consistent with the broad guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 99(2).
3. Each Member State shall provide the Council and the Commission with an annual report on the principal measures taken to implement its employment policy in the light of the guidelines for employment as referred to in paragraph 2.
4. The Council, on the basis of the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and having received the views of the Employment Committee, shall each year carry out an examination of the implementation of the employment policies of the Member States in the light of the guidelines for employment. The Council, acting by a qualified majority on a recommendation from the Commission, may, if it considers it appropriate in the light of that examination, make recommendations to Member States.
5. On the basis of the results of that examination, the Council and the Commission shall make a joint annual report to the European Council on the employment situation in the Community and on the implementation of the guidelines for employment.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
But the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
Thus, the changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 128 the ‘Community’ was replaced by the ‘Union’ and the referrals to other treaty provisions adjusted.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 128 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 148 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 148 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 128 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 148 TFEU
(ex Article 128 TEC)
1. The European Council shall each year consider the employment situation in the Union and adopt conclusions thereon, on the basis of a joint annual report by the Council and the Commission.
2. On the basis of the conclusions of the European Council, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee referred to in Article 150, shall each year draw up guidelines which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies. These guidelines shall be consistent with the broad guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 121(2).
3. Each Member State shall provide the Council and the Commission with an annual report on the principal measures taken to implement its employment policy in the light of the guidelines for employment as referred to in paragraph 2.
4. The Council, on the basis of the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and having received the views of the Employment Committee, shall each year carry out an examination of the implementation of the employment policies of the Member States in the light of the guidelines for employment. The Council, on a recommendation from the Commission, may, if it considers it appropriate in the light of that examination, make recommendations to Member States.
5. On the basis of the results of that examination, the Council and the Commission shall make a joint annual report to the European Council on the employment situation in the Union and on the implementation of the guidelines for employment.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
Roughly, European Community (European Union) action could be described as a mandatory planning, implementing and evaluating exercise using soft tools like open coordination, ‘best practices’ etc.
Even if the TEC partly reflects different sector views, the practical approach has evolved into a more holistic one knitting together economic, employment, innovation as well as research and education policy issues under the relaunched Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs.
***
European Council Conclusions
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08 REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
Cf. Article 128(1) TEC and Article 148(1) TFEU.
Legally, the Council preparing and following up is one Community institution, but a number of Council formations participate directly in the process or at least want to make their views known: ECOFIN, EPSCO, the Competitiveness Council, Education/Training and Youth.
***
Joint employment report
The European Council Conclusions are based on the joint annual report by the Council and the Commission, mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 5 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
The Joint Employment Report 2007/2008 (Council document 7169/08; 16 pages) is a bit more specific than the European Council Conclusions. This latest version is available at:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st07/st07169.en08.pdf
***
Council employment guidelines
After consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee, the Council adopts annual employment guidelines, based on the European Council Conclusions and a proposal by the Commission. (Cf. paragraph 2 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.)
The Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (Council document of 7 July 2008 10614/2/08 REV 2; 24 pages) is accessible at:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st10/st10614-re02.en08.pdf
***
National employment reports – National Reform Programmes – Lisbon strategy
Each member state delivers a national employment report annually, as laid out in paragraph 3 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
At this point in time, the Commission web site has on offer the page Member States’ autumn 2007 reports on the implementation of their National Reform Programmes, with links to the national employment reports. In practice, they are both reporting and planning documents, where the planning part constitutes a development with regard to the treaty provision:
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/national-dimension/member-states-autumn-2007-reports/index_en.htm
The 2008 round of (Lisbon strategy) progress reports is well advanced, so the interested reader might find more up-to-date information on the National Reform Programmes by checking national government sites. (English translations are or will be available in many member states.)
***
Country-specific recommendations
The examination of the national employment reports is a mandatory part of the annual employment coordination cycle, but the Council has the option to issue recommendations to member states. Cf. paragraph 4 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
Ahead of the spring European Council, the Council addressed the following Country-specific Integrated Recommendations to the European Council (4 March 2008, document 7275/08; 58 pages):
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st07/st07275.en08.pdf
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A separate exercise, but with a wealth of background information, is the Commission’s annual employment report Employment in Europe.
On 18 November 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual Employment in Europe 2008 Report (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
According to the Commission, the Employment in Europe 2008 Report addresses topics that are high on the European Union's employment policy agenda. It gives a comprehensive overview of the employment situation in the EU, as well as an analysis of key labour market issues, including immigration, post-enlargement intra-EU labour mobility, quality of work and the link between education and employment.
For a quick overview, read the Commission’s MEMO/08/719 Employment in Europe:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/719&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
At the publication of the 2008 Employment in Europe Report the Commission highlighted labour immigration into the European Union and mobility of the workforce within the EU, so these questions were reflected in the media reports.
Ralf Grahn
At the treaty level there are fairly well-oiled procedures in place for the coordination of economic policies and employment policies, but how will the routines adapt to the deteriorating situation?
The European Council and the Council are the main European Union level players coordinating member states’ employment policies. Soft instruments – conclusions, guidelines, recommendations and reports – are used. The member states prepare national plans and annual employment reports. The Commission acts mainly in a supporting role, collating and cajoling.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 128 (ex Article 109q) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, sets out the choreography for the coordination of member states’ employment policies.
At the summit of these intergovernmental proceedings is the annual spring (March) European Council, dedicated to economic policy and reform issues. The European Council adopts conclusions based on a joint report by the Council and the Commission.
The Council then, after consultations, draws up employment guidelines consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines (BPEGs) for the member states.
Each member state presents an annual report on implementation.
The national reports are examined by the Council, which may make recommendations to the member state.
The Council and the Commission prepare a joint report on the employment situation and the implementation of the employment guidelines.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102–103):
Article 128 TEC
1. The European Council shall each year consider the employment situation in the Community and adopt conclusions thereon, on the basis of a joint annual report by the Council and the Commission.
2. On the basis of the conclusions of the European Council, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee referred to in Article 130, shall each year draw up guidelines which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies. These guidelines shall be consistent with the broad guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 99(2).
3. Each Member State shall provide the Council and the Commission with an annual report on the principal measures taken to implement its employment policy in the light of the guidelines for employment as referred to in paragraph 2.
4. The Council, on the basis of the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and having received the views of the Employment Committee, shall each year carry out an examination of the implementation of the employment policies of the Member States in the light of the guidelines for employment. The Council, acting by a qualified majority on a recommendation from the Commission, may, if it considers it appropriate in the light of that examination, make recommendations to Member States.
5. On the basis of the results of that examination, the Council and the Commission shall make a joint annual report to the European Council on the employment situation in the Community and on the implementation of the guidelines for employment.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
But the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
Thus, the changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In Article 128 the ‘Community’ was replaced by the ‘Union’ and the referrals to other treaty provisions adjusted.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 128 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 148 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 148 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 128 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 148 TFEU
(ex Article 128 TEC)
1. The European Council shall each year consider the employment situation in the Union and adopt conclusions thereon, on the basis of a joint annual report by the Council and the Commission.
2. On the basis of the conclusions of the European Council, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee referred to in Article 150, shall each year draw up guidelines which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies. These guidelines shall be consistent with the broad guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 121(2).
3. Each Member State shall provide the Council and the Commission with an annual report on the principal measures taken to implement its employment policy in the light of the guidelines for employment as referred to in paragraph 2.
4. The Council, on the basis of the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and having received the views of the Employment Committee, shall each year carry out an examination of the implementation of the employment policies of the Member States in the light of the guidelines for employment. The Council, on a recommendation from the Commission, may, if it considers it appropriate in the light of that examination, make recommendations to Member States.
5. On the basis of the results of that examination, the Council and the Commission shall make a joint annual report to the European Council on the employment situation in the Union and on the implementation of the guidelines for employment.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
Roughly, European Community (European Union) action could be described as a mandatory planning, implementing and evaluating exercise using soft tools like open coordination, ‘best practices’ etc.
Even if the TEC partly reflects different sector views, the practical approach has evolved into a more holistic one knitting together economic, employment, innovation as well as research and education policy issues under the relaunched Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs.
***
European Council Conclusions
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08 REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
Cf. Article 128(1) TEC and Article 148(1) TFEU.
Legally, the Council preparing and following up is one Community institution, but a number of Council formations participate directly in the process or at least want to make their views known: ECOFIN, EPSCO, the Competitiveness Council, Education/Training and Youth.
***
Joint employment report
The European Council Conclusions are based on the joint annual report by the Council and the Commission, mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 5 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
The Joint Employment Report 2007/2008 (Council document 7169/08; 16 pages) is a bit more specific than the European Council Conclusions. This latest version is available at:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st07/st07169.en08.pdf
***
Council employment guidelines
After consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Employment Committee, the Council adopts annual employment guidelines, based on the European Council Conclusions and a proposal by the Commission. (Cf. paragraph 2 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.)
The Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (Council document of 7 July 2008 10614/2/08 REV 2; 24 pages) is accessible at:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st10/st10614-re02.en08.pdf
***
National employment reports – National Reform Programmes – Lisbon strategy
Each member state delivers a national employment report annually, as laid out in paragraph 3 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
At this point in time, the Commission web site has on offer the page Member States’ autumn 2007 reports on the implementation of their National Reform Programmes, with links to the national employment reports. In practice, they are both reporting and planning documents, where the planning part constitutes a development with regard to the treaty provision:
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/national-dimension/member-states-autumn-2007-reports/index_en.htm
The 2008 round of (Lisbon strategy) progress reports is well advanced, so the interested reader might find more up-to-date information on the National Reform Programmes by checking national government sites. (English translations are or will be available in many member states.)
***
Country-specific recommendations
The examination of the national employment reports is a mandatory part of the annual employment coordination cycle, but the Council has the option to issue recommendations to member states. Cf. paragraph 4 of Article 128 TEC and Article 148 TFEU.
Ahead of the spring European Council, the Council addressed the following Country-specific Integrated Recommendations to the European Council (4 March 2008, document 7275/08; 58 pages):
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st07/st07275.en08.pdf
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A separate exercise, but with a wealth of background information, is the Commission’s annual employment report Employment in Europe.
On 18 November 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual Employment in Europe 2008 Report (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
According to the Commission, the Employment in Europe 2008 Report addresses topics that are high on the European Union's employment policy agenda. It gives a comprehensive overview of the employment situation in the EU, as well as an analysis of key labour market issues, including immigration, post-enlargement intra-EU labour mobility, quality of work and the link between education and employment.
For a quick overview, read the Commission’s MEMO/08/719 Employment in Europe:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/719&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
At the publication of the 2008 Employment in Europe Report the Commission highlighted labour immigration into the European Union and mobility of the workforce within the EU, so these questions were reflected in the media reports.
Ralf Grahn
Wednesday 26 November 2008
EU employment: European Community powers
Powers not conferred upon (attributed to) the European Community (EC) belong to the member states, and Community action shall anyway clear the tests of subsidiarity and proportionality, but in the case of the aim of a high level of employment the high contracting parties have decided to further underline their leading role by limiting the scope for EC action.
In this post we look at the basic structure of member state and European Community (European Union) competences concerning employment. Later posts can then turn to the concrete EC (EU) actions intended under the Title Employment in the existing Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty of Lisbon (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union).
***
Current TEC
The current Article 127 (ex Article 109p) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, essentially reiterates both the general employment aim – a high level of employment – and the restricted role of the European Community (European Union) in achieving this objective following from other treaty provisions.
The European Community (EC) shall contribute to a high level of employment, but the employment policies are ‘owned’ by the member states.
The EC encourages cooperation between member states.
The EC – if necessary – complements member states’ action.
Not content with the expression of conferred or attributed powers and the principles of subsidiarity and necessity (proportionality) in Article 5 TEC, the high contracting parties remind us in Article 127(1) TEC that the competences of the member states shall be respected.
Article 127(2) TEC sets out the horizontal character of employment-related policies, although the objective of a high level of employment with a fairly weak expression shall be ‘taken into consideration’ when EC policies and activities are formulated and implemented.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102):
Article 127 TEC
1. The Community shall contribute to a high level of employment by encouraging cooperation between Member States and by supporting and, if necessary, complementing their action. In doing so, the competences of the Member States shall be respected.
2. The objective of a high level of employment shall be taken into consideration in the formulation and implementation of Community policies and activities.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
But the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
Thus, the changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In both paragraphs of Article 127 the ‘Community’ was replaced by the ‘Union’.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 127 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 147 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 147 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 127 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 147 TFEU
(ex Article 127 TEC)
1. The Union shall contribute to a high level of employment by encouraging cooperation between Member States and by supporting and, if necessary, complementing their action. In doing so, the competences of the Member States shall be respected.
2. The objective of a high level of employment shall be taken into consideration in the formulation and implementation of Union policies and activities.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
***
Integrated guidelines – Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08 REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
(The following stage, for someone digging deeper, would be to look for formal adoption by the Council in its ECOFIN and EPSCO formations.)
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A wealth of information is contained in the Commission’s annual employment reports.
On 18 November 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual employment report, Employment in Europe 2008 (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
According to the Commission, the Employment in Europe 2008 Report addresses topics that are high on the European Union's employment policy agenda. It gives a comprehensive overview of the employment situation in the EU, as well as an analysis of key labour market issues, including immigration, post-enlargement intra-EU labour mobility, quality of work and the link between education and employment.
For a quick overview, read the Commission’s MEMO/08/719 Employment in Europe:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/719&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
At the publication of the 2008 Employment in Europe Report the Commission highlighted labour immigration into the European Union and mobility of the workforce within the EU, so these questions were reflected in the media reports.
Ralf Grahn
In this post we look at the basic structure of member state and European Community (European Union) competences concerning employment. Later posts can then turn to the concrete EC (EU) actions intended under the Title Employment in the existing Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty of Lisbon (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union).
***
Current TEC
The current Article 127 (ex Article 109p) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, essentially reiterates both the general employment aim – a high level of employment – and the restricted role of the European Community (European Union) in achieving this objective following from other treaty provisions.
The European Community (EC) shall contribute to a high level of employment, but the employment policies are ‘owned’ by the member states.
The EC encourages cooperation between member states.
The EC – if necessary – complements member states’ action.
Not content with the expression of conferred or attributed powers and the principles of subsidiarity and necessity (proportionality) in Article 5 TEC, the high contracting parties remind us in Article 127(1) TEC that the competences of the member states shall be respected.
Article 127(2) TEC sets out the horizontal character of employment-related policies, although the objective of a high level of employment with a fairly weak expression shall be ‘taken into consideration’ when EC policies and activities are formulated and implemented.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102):
Article 127 TEC
1. The Community shall contribute to a high level of employment by encouraging cooperation between Member States and by supporting and, if necessary, complementing their action. In doing so, the competences of the Member States shall be respected.
2. The objective of a high level of employment shall be taken into consideration in the formulation and implementation of Community policies and activities.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
But the treaty reform process, at least since the Treaty of Nice, has been focused on so called institutional innovations. With a few notable exceptions, most areas of Community policy have only been updated and adjusted technically to the different reform treaty versions: the draft Constitution, the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
Thus, the changes to the Title on employment in the Lisbon Treaty are minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy.
Consequently, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79). In both paragraphs of Article 127 the ‘Community’ was replaced by the ‘Union’.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 127 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 147 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 147 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 127 TEC with the minimal change in terminology and the renumbering noted above.
As a consequence, the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112, looks like this:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 147 TFEU
(ex Article 127 TEC)
1. The Union shall contribute to a high level of employment by encouraging cooperation between Member States and by supporting and, if necessary, complementing their action. In doing so, the competences of the Member States shall be respected.
2. The objective of a high level of employment shall be taken into consideration in the formulation and implementation of Union policies and activities.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
***
Integrated guidelines – Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08 REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
(The following stage, for someone digging deeper, would be to look for formal adoption by the Council in its ECOFIN and EPSCO formations.)
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A wealth of information is contained in the Commission’s annual employment reports.
On 18 November 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual employment report, Employment in Europe 2008 (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
According to the Commission, the Employment in Europe 2008 Report addresses topics that are high on the European Union's employment policy agenda. It gives a comprehensive overview of the employment situation in the EU, as well as an analysis of key labour market issues, including immigration, post-enlargement intra-EU labour mobility, quality of work and the link between education and employment.
For a quick overview, read the Commission’s MEMO/08/719 Employment in Europe:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/719&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
At the publication of the 2008 Employment in Europe Report the Commission highlighted labour immigration into the European Union and mobility of the workforce within the EU, so these questions were reflected in the media reports.
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday 25 November 2008
EU: Employment policies a common concern
Economic and employment policies are primarily carried out by the EU member states, but regarded as a matter of common concern and coordinated at European Union level.
We look at the treaty framework, the current treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon, before offering a few pointers about EU employment policies for further reading.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 126 (ex Article 109o) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, sets out the member states’ employment policies as the primary means to achieve the strategic employment aims of the European Community (European Union).
But the member states do not act in a vacuum, regardless of each other or the European Community as a whole. Their actions are tempered or enhanced by the coordinated strategy for employment referred to in the preceding Article 125 TEC.
To the employment objectives mentioned in Article 125 TEC, Article 126 TEC adds action consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines adopted by the Council.
Where, pursuant to Article 99(1) TEC the economic policies of the member states are to be regarded as a common concern and coordinated within the Council, Article 126(2) TEC lays down an obligation for the member states to regard promoting employment as a common concern and to coordinate their employment actions within the Council, although with the somewhat unclear proviso that this takes place ‘having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour’.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102):
Article 126 TEC
1. Member States, through their employment policies, shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in Article 125 in a way consistent with the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Community adopted pursuant to Article 99(2).
2. Member States, having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour, shall regard promoting employment as a matter of common concern and shall coordinate their action in this respect within the Council, in accordance with the provisions of Article 128.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
The changes to the Title on employment were minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy. Thus, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79).
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 126 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 146 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 146 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 126 TEC. The ‘Community’ is replace by the ‘Union’, according to the new terminology, and the Articles referred to have been adapted to the renumbering. See the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 146 TFEU
(ex Article 126 TEC)
1. Member States, through their employment policies, shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in Article 145 in a way consistent with the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Union adopted pursuant to Article 121(2).
2. Member States, having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour, shall regard promoting employment as a matter of common concern and shall coordinate their action in this respect within the Council, in accordance with the provisions of Article 148.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
***
Integrated guidelines – Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08
REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
(The following stage, for someone digging deeper, would be to look for formal adoption by the Council in its ECOFIN and EPSCO formations.)
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A wealth of information is contained in the Commission’s annual employment reports.
On 18 October 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual employment report, Employment in Europe 2008 (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
Ralf Grahn
We look at the treaty framework, the current treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon, before offering a few pointers about EU employment policies for further reading.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 126 (ex Article 109o) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), under the Title VIII Employment, sets out the member states’ employment policies as the primary means to achieve the strategic employment aims of the European Community (European Union).
But the member states do not act in a vacuum, regardless of each other or the European Community as a whole. Their actions are tempered or enhanced by the coordinated strategy for employment referred to in the preceding Article 125 TEC.
To the employment objectives mentioned in Article 125 TEC, Article 126 TEC adds action consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines adopted by the Council.
Where, pursuant to Article 99(1) TEC the economic policies of the member states are to be regarded as a common concern and coordinated within the Council, Article 126(2) TEC lays down an obligation for the member states to regard promoting employment as a common concern and to coordinate their employment actions within the Council, although with the somewhat unclear proviso that this takes place ‘having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour’.
The existing Article 126 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/102):
Article 126 TEC
1. Member States, through their employment policies, shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in Article 125 in a way consistent with the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Community adopted pursuant to Article 99(2).
2. Member States, having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour, shall regard promoting employment as a matter of common concern and shall coordinate their action in this respect within the Council, in accordance with the provisions of Article 128.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but in many instances it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
The changes to the Title on employment were minimal. Article 2, point 111 deleted a few words from Article 125 TEC and the following point (112) concerned the common commercial policy. Thus, Article 126 TEC and the following ones underwent only horizontal or technical amendments (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79).
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 126 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 146 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/214).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 146 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the contents of the existing Article 126 TEC. The ‘Community’ is replace by the ‘Union’, according to the new terminology, and the Articles referred to have been adapted to the renumbering. See the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/112:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 146 TFEU
(ex Article 126 TEC)
1. Member States, through their employment policies, shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in Article 145 in a way consistent with the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Union adopted pursuant to Article 121(2).
2. Member States, having regard to national practices related to the responsibilities of management and labour, shall regard promoting employment as a matter of common concern and shall coordinate their action in this respect within the Council, in accordance with the provisions of Article 148.
***
Employment policy coordination
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
***
Integrated guidelines – Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs
The economic and employment guidelines (BEPGs and Employment Guidelines), the main focus of the spring European Council, have been integrated and subsumed under the relaunched Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, but essentially adopted without change for a second three year period (2008–2010) last spring.
The first ten pages of the revised Presidency Conclusions of the European Council 13–14 March 2008, including the references to the National Reform Programmes and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, are available as a gateway to understanding the system and the state of play (Council document 7652/1/08
REV 1):
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/99410.pdf
(The following stage, for someone digging deeper, would be to look for formal adoption by the Council in its ECOFIN and EPSCO formations.)
***
Employment in Europe 2008 Report
A wealth of information is contained in the Commission’s annual employment reports.
On 18 October 2008 the Commission published its twentieth annual employment report, Employment in Europe 2008 (292 pages), accessible through:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=sv&catId=89&newsId=415
Ralf Grahn
Monday 24 November 2008
Employment aims of EU
A high level of employment or even full employment can be seen as important aims of the European Union (European Community), but the real scope of action at European level requires a closer look at the treaties.
Outside circumstances and inter-related Community policies affect the employment levels, not only ‘employment policy’ in a narrow sense.
Economic, employment and social policies are mainly national (despite the single currency), so the European Community (European Union) is left with various coordinating tasks.
A coordinated strategy for employment is a task for the member states and the Community.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 125 (ex Article 109n) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) introduces Title VIII Employment by envisioning a coordinated strategy for employment and referring to treaty objectives (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/101):
TITLE VIII
EMPLOYMENT
Article 125 TEC
Member States and the Community shall, in accordance with this title, work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment and particularly for promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce and labour markets responsive to economic change with a view to achieving the objectives defined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and in Article 2 of this Treaty.
***
Objectives TEU and TEC
Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU ) first mentions the objectives “to promote economic and social progress and a high level of employment”.
Article 2 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) gives the Community the task to promote a high level of employment:
Article 2 TEC
The Community shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and an economic and monetary union and by implementing common policies or activities referred to in Articles 3 and 4, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities, a high level of employment and of social protection, equality between men and women, sustainable and non-inflationary growth, a high degree of competitiveness and convergence of economic performance, a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
We notice that there was no major explicit amendment to Article 125 TEC according to Article 2, point 111 of the original Lisbon Treaty (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79):
EMPLOYMENT
111) In Article 125, the words ‘and in Article 2 of this Treaty’ shall be deleted.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 125 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 145 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/213).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) retains the current safeguard measures without substantial change. See the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/73:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 145 TFEU
(ex Article 125 TEC)
Member States and the Union shall, in accordance with this Title, work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment and particularly for promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce and labour markets responsive to economic change with a view to achieving the objectives defined in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union.
***
TEU objectives
Instead of ‘a high level of employment’, Article 3(3) TEU sets the EU ‘aiming at full employment’ in the Treaty of Lisbon (Reform Treaty), but it is better to see the words in context (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/17):
Article 3(3) TEU
(ex Article 2 TEU)
-----.
3. The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.
-----
***
Competence
Aiming at a high level of employment or even at full employment sounds very nice, but the level of employment is determined more by other policies and circumstances than by employment policy in a narrow sense.
What can the European Union (European Community) be expected to contribute to employment policy?
One of the nice things about the Lisbon Treaty is that it clarifies the different EU competences (powers).
Title I Categories and areas of Union competence of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union offers us the basic information about the role of the EU (EC). Article 2(3) TFEU evades naming employment under the three clear main categories: exclusive competence, shared competence and competence to support, coordinate or supplement.
The provision does not mention an EU (EC) employment policy. Instead, paragraph 3 speaks of member states’ policies. The member states are supposed to coordinate their economic and employment policies, with the EU’s role to be defined separately:
Article 2(3) TFEU
3. The Member States shall coordinate their economic and employment policies within arrangements as determined by this Treaty, which the Union shall have competence to provide.
***
Coordination of member states’ policies
Article 5 TFEU is a separate Article, which specifically mentions three related areas, where the member states coordinate their policies within the union (instead of including them among the policy areas for supporting, coordinating or supplementing actions in Article 6 TFEU):
Article 5 TFEU
1. The Member States shall coordinate their economic policies within the Union. To this end, the Council shall adopt measures, in particular broad guidelines for these policies.
Specific provisions shall apply to those Member States whose currency is the euro.
2. The Union shall take measures to ensure coordination of the employment policies of the Member States, in particular by defining guidelines for these policies.
3. The Union may take initiatives to ensure coordination of Member States' social policies.
***
Horizontal clause
A high level of employment appears in Article 9 TFEU, a horizontal provision affecting all EU policies and activities, in Title II Provisions having general application:
Article 9 TFEU
In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health.
***
Employment policy
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
Ralf Grahn
Outside circumstances and inter-related Community policies affect the employment levels, not only ‘employment policy’ in a narrow sense.
Economic, employment and social policies are mainly national (despite the single currency), so the European Community (European Union) is left with various coordinating tasks.
A coordinated strategy for employment is a task for the member states and the Community.
***
Current TEC
The current Article 125 (ex Article 109n) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) introduces Title VIII Employment by envisioning a coordinated strategy for employment and referring to treaty objectives (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/101):
TITLE VIII
EMPLOYMENT
Article 125 TEC
Member States and the Community shall, in accordance with this title, work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment and particularly for promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce and labour markets responsive to economic change with a view to achieving the objectives defined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and in Article 2 of this Treaty.
***
Objectives TEU and TEC
Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU ) first mentions the objectives “to promote economic and social progress and a high level of employment”.
Article 2 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) gives the Community the task to promote a high level of employment:
Article 2 TEC
The Community shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and an economic and monetary union and by implementing common policies or activities referred to in Articles 3 and 4, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities, a high level of employment and of social protection, equality between men and women, sustainable and non-inflationary growth, a high degree of competitiveness and convergence of economic performance, a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States.
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) is still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, but it is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
We notice that there was no major explicit amendment to Article 125 TEC according to Article 2, point 111 of the original Lisbon Treaty (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79):
EMPLOYMENT
111) In Article 125, the words ‘and in Article 2 of this Treaty’ shall be deleted.
***
Renumbering
The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title VIII Employment was to be renumbered Title IX and that Article 125 TEC and TFEU (ToL) was to be renumbered Article 145 TFEU in the consolidated version of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/213).
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty
Article 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) retains the current safeguard measures without substantial change. See the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/73:
TITLE IX
EMPLOYMENT
Article 145 TFEU
(ex Article 125 TEC)
Member States and the Union shall, in accordance with this Title, work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment and particularly for promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce and labour markets responsive to economic change with a view to achieving the objectives defined in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union.
***
TEU objectives
Instead of ‘a high level of employment’, Article 3(3) TEU sets the EU ‘aiming at full employment’ in the Treaty of Lisbon (Reform Treaty), but it is better to see the words in context (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/17):
Article 3(3) TEU
(ex Article 2 TEU)
-----.
3. The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.
-----
***
Competence
Aiming at a high level of employment or even at full employment sounds very nice, but the level of employment is determined more by other policies and circumstances than by employment policy in a narrow sense.
What can the European Union (European Community) be expected to contribute to employment policy?
One of the nice things about the Lisbon Treaty is that it clarifies the different EU competences (powers).
Title I Categories and areas of Union competence of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union offers us the basic information about the role of the EU (EC). Article 2(3) TFEU evades naming employment under the three clear main categories: exclusive competence, shared competence and competence to support, coordinate or supplement.
The provision does not mention an EU (EC) employment policy. Instead, paragraph 3 speaks of member states’ policies. The member states are supposed to coordinate their economic and employment policies, with the EU’s role to be defined separately:
Article 2(3) TFEU
3. The Member States shall coordinate their economic and employment policies within arrangements as determined by this Treaty, which the Union shall have competence to provide.
***
Coordination of member states’ policies
Article 5 TFEU is a separate Article, which specifically mentions three related areas, where the member states coordinate their policies within the union (instead of including them among the policy areas for supporting, coordinating or supplementing actions in Article 6 TFEU):
Article 5 TFEU
1. The Member States shall coordinate their economic policies within the Union. To this end, the Council shall adopt measures, in particular broad guidelines for these policies.
Specific provisions shall apply to those Member States whose currency is the euro.
2. The Union shall take measures to ensure coordination of the employment policies of the Member States, in particular by defining guidelines for these policies.
3. The Union may take initiatives to ensure coordination of Member States' social policies.
***
Horizontal clause
A high level of employment appears in Article 9 TFEU, a horizontal provision affecting all EU policies and activities, in Title II Provisions having general application:
Article 9 TFEU
In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health.
***
Employment policy
Readers interested in the practical side of the European employment strategy can start with the Introduction and the links offered by the European Commission’s DG Employment and Social Affairs:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/index_en.htm
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
coordination,
EC,
employment,
employment level,
employment strategy,
EU,
EU Law,
European Community,
European Union,
Lisbon Treaty,
TEC,
TFEU
Sunday 23 November 2008
EMU: Balance of payments crisis and safeguard measures
EU institutions, finance ministries, corporations and EU citizens have reason to study the possible remedies to serious balance of payments difficulties, in case matters take a turn to the worse.
“Living in interesting times” as regards international financial markets, it may be good to know that the current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) foresee temporary safeguard measures to protect economic and monetary union (EMU) in exceptional circumstances.
There are separate transitional provisions for the EU member states with a derogation, i.e. outside the eurozone.
***
EMU safeguard measures
Current TEC
The European Community (European Union) prohibits all restrictions on the movement of capital and payments between member states and between member states and third countries, although abolishing existing restrictions with regard to third countries is a less absolute aim.
Within the context of economic and monetary union (EMU) restrictions are unthinkable, but in exceptional circumstances serious difficulties may give cause for temporary safeguard measures with regard to third countries.
The current Article 59 (ex Article 109i) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found in the latest consolidated version of the treaties (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/65):
Article 59 TEC
Where, in exceptional circumstances, movements of capital to or from third countries cause, or threaten to cause, serious difficulties for the operation of economic and monetary union, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the ECB, may take safeguard measures with regard to third countries for a period not exceeding six months if such measures are strictly necessary.
***
Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon, still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
Article 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) retains the current safeguard measures without substantial change. See the concolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/73:
Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’
Title IV TFEU (ex Title III) ‘Free movement of persons, services and capital’
Chapter 4 ‘Capital and payments’
Article 66 TFEU
(ex Article 59 TEC)
Where, in exceptional circumstances, movements of capital to or from third countries cause, or threaten to cause, serious difficulties for the operation of economic and monetary union, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Central Bank, may take safeguard measures with regard to third countries for a period not exceeding six months if such measures are strictly necessary.
***
Comment
We live “in interesting times” as regards the stability of the financial markets, so Article 59 TEC and Article 66 TFEU may be of more than purely theoretical interest.
The provision offers the EU possibilities to safeguard the operation of economic and monetary union (EMU) with regard to third countries.
These measures can not be taken lightly: ‘exceptional circumstances’, ‘serious difficulties’ and ‘strictly necessary’ all circumscribe recourse to such measures, which are contrary to the aims of free movement of capital and payments.
In addition, six months is the maximum duration of a measure (but the wording does not exclude a new decision).
***
Transitional provisions
There are still twelve EU member states outside the eurozone. Denmark and the United Kingdom have negotiated exceptions (opt-outs) unlimited in time. The other member states with a derogation are Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia (until 1 January 2009) and Sweden.
The transitional EMU provisions take account of potential balance of payments problems at two levels, serious problems and a sudden crisis.
***
Serious balance of payments difficulties
Existing TEC
Article 119 TEC (ex Article 109h) sets out the current rules, which illustrate how the problems of one member state may have repercussions for the rest, notably through the internal market and external trade (in relation to third countries).
Primarily, if a member state (with a derogation) is seriously threatened with balance of payments problems, the member state acts, within the provisions of the TEC, to remedy the situation. Then, the Commission investigates and may issue recommendations to the state.
If the actions are insufficient, the Commission can recommend that the Council grants mutual assistance to the member state in difficulties.
If mutual assistance is not granted, or if the assistance given and the measures taken prove to be insufficient, the Commission can authorise the member state to take (exceptional) protective measures. These are subject to ex post review by the Council.
The current Article 119 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/96-97):
Article 119 TEC
1. Where a Member State is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with difficulties as regards its balance of payments either as a result of an overall disequilibrium in its balance of payments, or as a result of the type of currency at its disposal, and where such difficulties are liable in particular to jeopardise the functioning of the common market or the progressive implementation of the common commercial policy, the Commission shall immediately investigate the position of the State in question and the action which, making use of all the means at its disposal, that State has taken or may take in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty. The Commission shall state what measures it recommends the State concerned to take.
If the action taken by a Member State and the measures suggested by the Commission do not prove sufficient to overcome the difficulties which have arisen or which threaten, the Commission shall, after consulting the Committee referred to in Article 114, recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance and appropriate methods therefor.
The Commission shall keep the Council regularly informed of the situation and of how it is developing.
2. The Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall grant such mutual assistance; it shall adopt directives or decisions laying down the conditions and details of such assistance, which may take such forms as:
(a) a concerted approach to or within any other international organisations to which Member States may have recourse;
(b) measures needed to avoid deflection of trade where the State which is in difficulties maintains or reintroduces quantitative restrictions against third countries;
(c) the granting of limited credits by other Member States, subject to their agreement.
3. If the mutual assistance recommended by the Commission is not granted by the Council or if the mutual assistance granted and the measures taken are insufficient, the Commission shall authorise the State which is in difficulties to take protective measures, the conditions and details of which the Commission shall determine.
Such authorisation may be revoked and such conditions and details may be changed by the Council acting by a qualified majority.
4. Subject to Article 122(6), this Article shall cease to apply from the beginning of the third stage.
***
Lisbon Treaty
Article 143 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the substance of Article 119 TEC, but the updated wording more clearly presents the transitional character of the provision and that the provision concerns member states with a derogation.
Article 143 TFEU in the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/110-111:
Article 143 TFEU
(ex Article 119 TEC)
1. Where a Member State with a derogation is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with difficulties as regards its balance of payments either as a result of an overall disequilibrium in its balance of payments, or as a result of the type of currency at its disposal, and where such difficulties are liable in particular to jeopardise the functioning of the internal market or the implementation of the common commercial policy, the Commission shall immediately investigate the position of the State in question and the action which, making use of all the means at its disposal, that State has taken or may take in accordance with the provisions of the Treaties. The Commission shall state what measures it recommends the State concerned to take.
If the action taken by a Member State with a derogation and the measures suggested by the Commission do not prove sufficient to overcome the difficulties which have arisen or which threaten, the Commission shall, after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee, recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance and appropriate methods therefor.
The Commission shall keep the Council regularly informed of the situation and of how it is developing.
2. The Council shall grant such mutual assistance; it shall adopt directives or decisions laying down the conditions and details of such assistance, which may take such forms as:
(a) a concerted approach to or within any other international organisations to which Member States with a derogation may have recourse;
(b) measures needed to avoid deflection of trade where the Member State with a derogation which is in difficulties maintains or reintroduces quantitative restrictions against third countries;
(c) the granting of limited credits by other Member States, subject to their agreement.
3. If the mutual assistance recommended by the Commission is not granted by the Council or if the mutual assistance granted and the measures taken are insufficient, the Commission shall authorise the Member State with a derogation which is in difficulties to take protective measures, the conditions and details of which the Commission shall determine.
Such authorisation may be revoked and such conditions and details may be changed by the Council.
***
Balance of payments crisis
Protective measures
Current TEC
Article 119 TEC (and Article 143 TFEU) concerned serious balance of payments difficulties. The second level is represented by Article 120 TEC, which concerns even more serious imbalances, namely a sudden crisis, which may lead to (exceptional) protective measures:
Article 120 TEC in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/97:
Page 97
Article 120 TEC
1. Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 119(2) is not immediately taken, the Member State concerned may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the common market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.
2. The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 119.
3. After the Commission has delivered an opinion and the Committee referred to in Article 114 has been consulted, the Council may, acting by a qualified majority, decide that the State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.
4. Subject to Article 122(6), this Article shall cease to apply from the beginning of the third
stage.
***
Lisbon Treaty
The Articles 143 and 144 TFEU are closely linked. When balance of payments problems occur suddenly and on a massive scale, Article 144 TFEU with potential unilateral protective measures kicks in.
Article 144 TFEU does not change the substance of Article 120 TEC. Disturbances in the functioning of the internal market must still be minimal and the scope of the measures restricted to the strictly necessary.
These exceptional measures quickly become European Union (European Community) matters. The Commission and the Council (Ecofin) can act to grant mutual assistance to a member state hit by a balance of payments crisis, but the EU institutions also review the measures ex post.
The Lisbon Treaty wording clarifies and updates the provision. Because of the beginning of third stage of economic and monetary union (EMU), Article 144 TFEU clearly expresses that this provision directly concerns the member states with a derogation (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/111):
Article 144 TFEU
(ex Article 120 TEC)
1. Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 143(2) is not immediately taken, a Member State with a derogation may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the internal market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.
2. The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 143.
3. After the Commission has delivered a recommendation and the Economic and Financial Committee has been consulted, the Council may decide that the Member State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.
***
The existing and the proposed treaty provisions on responses to exceptional circumstances are clearly based on the idea of an evolving de facto solidarity between the member states of the European Union.
Serious difficulties and crises have to be faced together, although there are different provisions for the eurozone as a whole and the non-euro area member states (with a derogation), still forced to fight the financial tempests individually.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. A more detailed blog article on Article 119 TEC and Article 143 TFEU was meant to precede the above post, but it got stuck in technical problems, which have to be sorted out before publication.
“Living in interesting times” as regards international financial markets, it may be good to know that the current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) foresee temporary safeguard measures to protect economic and monetary union (EMU) in exceptional circumstances.
There are separate transitional provisions for the EU member states with a derogation, i.e. outside the eurozone.
***
EMU safeguard measures
Current TEC
The European Community (European Union) prohibits all restrictions on the movement of capital and payments between member states and between member states and third countries, although abolishing existing restrictions with regard to third countries is a less absolute aim.
Within the context of economic and monetary union (EMU) restrictions are unthinkable, but in exceptional circumstances serious difficulties may give cause for temporary safeguard measures with regard to third countries.
The current Article 59 (ex Article 109i) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found in the latest consolidated version of the treaties (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/65):
Article 59 TEC
Where, in exceptional circumstances, movements of capital to or from third countries cause, or threaten to cause, serious difficulties for the operation of economic and monetary union, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the ECB, may take safeguard measures with regard to third countries for a period not exceeding six months if such measures are strictly necessary.
***
Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon, still on its rocky road to possible entry into force, is the most up-to-date manifestation of what the member state governments want the treaties to say.
Article 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) retains the current safeguard measures without substantial change. See the concolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/73:
Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’
Title IV TFEU (ex Title III) ‘Free movement of persons, services and capital’
Chapter 4 ‘Capital and payments’
Article 66 TFEU
(ex Article 59 TEC)
Where, in exceptional circumstances, movements of capital to or from third countries cause, or threaten to cause, serious difficulties for the operation of economic and monetary union, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Central Bank, may take safeguard measures with regard to third countries for a period not exceeding six months if such measures are strictly necessary.
***
Comment
We live “in interesting times” as regards the stability of the financial markets, so Article 59 TEC and Article 66 TFEU may be of more than purely theoretical interest.
The provision offers the EU possibilities to safeguard the operation of economic and monetary union (EMU) with regard to third countries.
These measures can not be taken lightly: ‘exceptional circumstances’, ‘serious difficulties’ and ‘strictly necessary’ all circumscribe recourse to such measures, which are contrary to the aims of free movement of capital and payments.
In addition, six months is the maximum duration of a measure (but the wording does not exclude a new decision).
***
Transitional provisions
There are still twelve EU member states outside the eurozone. Denmark and the United Kingdom have negotiated exceptions (opt-outs) unlimited in time. The other member states with a derogation are Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia (until 1 January 2009) and Sweden.
The transitional EMU provisions take account of potential balance of payments problems at two levels, serious problems and a sudden crisis.
***
Serious balance of payments difficulties
Existing TEC
Article 119 TEC (ex Article 109h) sets out the current rules, which illustrate how the problems of one member state may have repercussions for the rest, notably through the internal market and external trade (in relation to third countries).
Primarily, if a member state (with a derogation) is seriously threatened with balance of payments problems, the member state acts, within the provisions of the TEC, to remedy the situation. Then, the Commission investigates and may issue recommendations to the state.
If the actions are insufficient, the Commission can recommend that the Council grants mutual assistance to the member state in difficulties.
If mutual assistance is not granted, or if the assistance given and the measures taken prove to be insufficient, the Commission can authorise the member state to take (exceptional) protective measures. These are subject to ex post review by the Council.
The current Article 119 TEC (in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/96-97):
Article 119 TEC
1. Where a Member State is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with difficulties as regards its balance of payments either as a result of an overall disequilibrium in its balance of payments, or as a result of the type of currency at its disposal, and where such difficulties are liable in particular to jeopardise the functioning of the common market or the progressive implementation of the common commercial policy, the Commission shall immediately investigate the position of the State in question and the action which, making use of all the means at its disposal, that State has taken or may take in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty. The Commission shall state what measures it recommends the State concerned to take.
If the action taken by a Member State and the measures suggested by the Commission do not prove sufficient to overcome the difficulties which have arisen or which threaten, the Commission shall, after consulting the Committee referred to in Article 114, recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance and appropriate methods therefor.
The Commission shall keep the Council regularly informed of the situation and of how it is developing.
2. The Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall grant such mutual assistance; it shall adopt directives or decisions laying down the conditions and details of such assistance, which may take such forms as:
(a) a concerted approach to or within any other international organisations to which Member States may have recourse;
(b) measures needed to avoid deflection of trade where the State which is in difficulties maintains or reintroduces quantitative restrictions against third countries;
(c) the granting of limited credits by other Member States, subject to their agreement.
3. If the mutual assistance recommended by the Commission is not granted by the Council or if the mutual assistance granted and the measures taken are insufficient, the Commission shall authorise the State which is in difficulties to take protective measures, the conditions and details of which the Commission shall determine.
Such authorisation may be revoked and such conditions and details may be changed by the Council acting by a qualified majority.
4. Subject to Article 122(6), this Article shall cease to apply from the beginning of the third stage.
***
Lisbon Treaty
Article 143 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) takes over the substance of Article 119 TEC, but the updated wording more clearly presents the transitional character of the provision and that the provision concerns member states with a derogation.
Article 143 TFEU in the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/110-111:
Article 143 TFEU
(ex Article 119 TEC)
1. Where a Member State with a derogation is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with difficulties as regards its balance of payments either as a result of an overall disequilibrium in its balance of payments, or as a result of the type of currency at its disposal, and where such difficulties are liable in particular to jeopardise the functioning of the internal market or the implementation of the common commercial policy, the Commission shall immediately investigate the position of the State in question and the action which, making use of all the means at its disposal, that State has taken or may take in accordance with the provisions of the Treaties. The Commission shall state what measures it recommends the State concerned to take.
If the action taken by a Member State with a derogation and the measures suggested by the Commission do not prove sufficient to overcome the difficulties which have arisen or which threaten, the Commission shall, after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee, recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance and appropriate methods therefor.
The Commission shall keep the Council regularly informed of the situation and of how it is developing.
2. The Council shall grant such mutual assistance; it shall adopt directives or decisions laying down the conditions and details of such assistance, which may take such forms as:
(a) a concerted approach to or within any other international organisations to which Member States with a derogation may have recourse;
(b) measures needed to avoid deflection of trade where the Member State with a derogation which is in difficulties maintains or reintroduces quantitative restrictions against third countries;
(c) the granting of limited credits by other Member States, subject to their agreement.
3. If the mutual assistance recommended by the Commission is not granted by the Council or if the mutual assistance granted and the measures taken are insufficient, the Commission shall authorise the Member State with a derogation which is in difficulties to take protective measures, the conditions and details of which the Commission shall determine.
Such authorisation may be revoked and such conditions and details may be changed by the Council.
***
Balance of payments crisis
Protective measures
Current TEC
Article 119 TEC (and Article 143 TFEU) concerned serious balance of payments difficulties. The second level is represented by Article 120 TEC, which concerns even more serious imbalances, namely a sudden crisis, which may lead to (exceptional) protective measures:
Article 120 TEC in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/97:
Page 97
Article 120 TEC
1. Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 119(2) is not immediately taken, the Member State concerned may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the common market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.
2. The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 119.
3. After the Commission has delivered an opinion and the Committee referred to in Article 114 has been consulted, the Council may, acting by a qualified majority, decide that the State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.
4. Subject to Article 122(6), this Article shall cease to apply from the beginning of the third
stage.
***
Lisbon Treaty
The Articles 143 and 144 TFEU are closely linked. When balance of payments problems occur suddenly and on a massive scale, Article 144 TFEU with potential unilateral protective measures kicks in.
Article 144 TFEU does not change the substance of Article 120 TEC. Disturbances in the functioning of the internal market must still be minimal and the scope of the measures restricted to the strictly necessary.
These exceptional measures quickly become European Union (European Community) matters. The Commission and the Council (Ecofin) can act to grant mutual assistance to a member state hit by a balance of payments crisis, but the EU institutions also review the measures ex post.
The Lisbon Treaty wording clarifies and updates the provision. Because of the beginning of third stage of economic and monetary union (EMU), Article 144 TFEU clearly expresses that this provision directly concerns the member states with a derogation (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/111):
Article 144 TFEU
(ex Article 120 TEC)
1. Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 143(2) is not immediately taken, a Member State with a derogation may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the internal market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.
2. The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 143.
3. After the Commission has delivered a recommendation and the Economic and Financial Committee has been consulted, the Council may decide that the Member State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.
***
The existing and the proposed treaty provisions on responses to exceptional circumstances are clearly based on the idea of an evolving de facto solidarity between the member states of the European Union.
Serious difficulties and crises have to be faced together, although there are different provisions for the eurozone as a whole and the non-euro area member states (with a derogation), still forced to fight the financial tempests individually.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. A more detailed blog article on Article 119 TEC and Article 143 TFEU was meant to precede the above post, but it got stuck in technical problems, which have to be sorted out before publication.
Friday 21 November 2008
Sweden ratifies Lisbon Treaty
After twelve hours of plenary debate, the Swedish Parliament (Sveriges Riksdag) approved the EU Lisbon Treaty at midnight local time, clearing the way for formal ratification by depositing the ratification instrument in Rome.
Source:
http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_HtmlCallPage____16504.aspx
Approval required a three fourths majority.
The provisional minutes are promised in a few hours.
***
This leaves the Czech Republic, the holder of the next EU Council presidency, as the lone straggler among the member states’ parliaments.
In Poland and Germany the parliaments have approved the amending Treaty of Lisbon, but the Polish President has obstructed and the German Constitutional Court has not yet ruled on a number of complaints.
After the Swedish vote, rejectionist Ireland is a little bit more in a category of its own among the 27 member states of the European Union.
The Committee report, Utrikesutskottets betänkande 2008/09:UU8, is now available on the Parliament’s web site: www.riksdagen.se .
Ralf Grahn
Source:
http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_HtmlCallPage____16504.aspx
Approval required a three fourths majority.
The provisional minutes are promised in a few hours.
***
This leaves the Czech Republic, the holder of the next EU Council presidency, as the lone straggler among the member states’ parliaments.
In Poland and Germany the parliaments have approved the amending Treaty of Lisbon, but the Polish President has obstructed and the German Constitutional Court has not yet ruled on a number of complaints.
After the Swedish vote, rejectionist Ireland is a little bit more in a category of its own among the 27 member states of the European Union.
The Committee report, Utrikesutskottets betänkande 2008/09:UU8, is now available on the Parliament’s web site: www.riksdagen.se .
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
EU,
EU debate,
EU politics,
European Union,
Lisbon Treaty,
ratification,
Sweden
Thursday 20 November 2008
EMU: Exchange rate policies as a common interest
This blog post is dedicated to our readers in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom, the member states with a derogation within the context of economic and monetary union (EMU), but the national exchange-rate policies are defined as a matter of common interest to all EU member states (and citizens).
The EU Treaty of Lisbon updates the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), by taking into account the establishment of the eurozone and the experiences within the exchange-rate mechanism (ERM II).
***
Current treaty
The current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) sets out Transitional provisions in Chapter 4 of Title VII Economic and monetary policy, in Part Three Community policies (in the latest codified version of the treaties, Official Journal 29.12.2006 C 321 E/93─101)
Chapter 4 Transitional provisions contains Articles 116 to 124 TEC.
***
Exchange-rate policy as a common interest
Article 124 TEC (ex Article 109m) set out the exchange-rate policy of each member state as a matter of common interest before the beginning of the third stage of economic and monetary union (EMU), when the single currency, the euro, replaced the national exchange-rate policies of the member states which adopted the euro. Article 124 TEC continues to apply ‘by analogy’ to the member states with a derogation, i.e. outside the eurozone:
Article 124 TEC
1. Until the beginning of the third stage, each Member State shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, Member States shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the European Monetary System (EMS) and in developing the ecu, and shall respect existing powers in this field.
2. From the beginning of the third stage and for as long as a Member State has a derogation, paragraph 1 shall apply by analogy to the exchange-rate policy of that Member State.
***
Draft Constitution
The euro currency had been introduced, and the euro banknotes and coins were in circulation, when the European Convention deliberated institutional reform of the European Union. It is hardly surprising that the Convention proposed a reworked section with the aim to simplify and to clarify the transitional provisions.
Section 4 Transitional provisions comprises Articles III-91 to III-96 of the draft Constitution (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/45─46).
Article III-94 of the draft Constitution updated Article 124 TEC to take account of the introduction of the euro, which had left only three of the fifteen existing member states outside the euro area (Denmark, the United Kingdom and Sweden), but with twelve new member states set to join the European Union in the so called big bang enlargement:
SECTION 4
Transitional provisions
Article III-94 Draft Constitution
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, it shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
Finland
The Finnish government reported on the results of the European Convention in Valtioneuvoston selonteko Eduskunnalle konventin tuloksista ja valmistautumisesta hallitusten väliseen konferenssiin (VNS 2/2003 vp). Finland had adopted the euro. A section discussed economic and monetary policy (8.5 Talous. ja rahapolitiikka) on pages 65 to 67, but I found nothing specific about Article III-94 of the draft Constitution.
***
Sweden
Ahead of the intergovernmental conference, the Swedish government presented its views in a memorandum, Regeringens skrivelse 2003/04:13 Europeiska konventet om EU:s framtid (2 October 2003).
Sweden had not negotiated an opt-out from the treaty obligation to introduce the euro currency, but still the government had arranged a referendum on the adoption. The negative referendum result, which left Sweden in legal limbo, was fresh.
If the updated Article III-94 of the draft Constitution had little direct significance for Finland, Sweden on the contrary retained a national exchange-rate policy and a treatment of the ‘common interest’ would not have been out of place.
In spite of this, I found no specific mention of draft Constitution Article III-94 in the memorandum.
***
de Poncins
Étienne de Poncins presented the text of Article III-94 in Vers une Constitution européenne (Éditions 10/18, 2003), page 315, without comment.
***
Common interest?
Not one comment from the three sources checked; is this an indication of the significance of matters defined as common interests?
***
Constitutional Treaty
The transitional EMU provisions of the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2004) are found in Section 5 Transitional provisions, comprising Articles III-197 to 202 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/86─90).
The exchange-rate policies as matters of common interest were mentioned in Article III-200:
Article III-200 Constitution
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, it shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
Let us see it our standard references are more informative concerning the signed Constitutional Treaty, than they were with regard to the draft Constitution.
***
Sweden
The government of Sweden, still outside the eurozone as a member state with a derogation, offered a short and bland description of the aims of economic and monetary union (EMU) in the draft ratification bill, Lagrådsremiss Fördraget om upprättande av en konstitution för Europa (2 June 2005), page 171:
.
”Den ekonomiska och monetära unionen (EMU) är ett samarbete inom EU som syftar till att samordna medlemsländernas ekonomiska politik och att införa en gemensam valuta. EMU har genomförts i tre etapper. Den sista etappen inleddes 1999 och innebär en fullbordad valutaunion med gemensam centralbank (Europeiska centralbanken) samt gemensam valuta och penningpolitik. En förutsättning för valutaunionen har varit och är att de deltagande ländernas ekonomier befinner sig på ungefär samma nivå. Ett antal ekonomiska krav som ett land måste uppfylla för att få delta i valutaunionen har därför ställts upp, de s.k. konvergenskriterierna. För att säkerställa sunda offentliga finanser inom unionen har därför EU inrättat den s.k. stabilitets- och tillväxtpakten.”
The Swedish government did not mention Article III-200 of the Constitution specifically, although Sweden through its national central bank (Sveriges Riksbank) has a national exchange-rate policy, defined as a common interest for the European Union as a whole.
***
Finland
In Finland, the government’s ratification bill, Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan perustuslaista tehdyn sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta (HE 67/2006 vp), mentioned Article III-200 of the Constitution on page 185. The government remarked that Article III-200 corresponds with Article 124 TEC without substantial change:
”III-200 artikla, joka koskee valuuttakurssipolitiikkaa niiden maiden osalta, joissa euroa ei ole otettu käyttöön, vastaa asiasisällöltään SEY 124 artiklaa.”
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
In Article 2, point 104, of the original Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) updated Article 124 TEC by adopting the Convention and Constitution proposals, but the amendments were inserted in the ‘usual’, i.e. unreadable manner adopted by the IGC 2007 (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79):
104) An Article 118b shall be inserted, with the wording of Article 124(1); it shall be amended as follows:
(a) the words ‘Until the beginning of the third stage, each Member State shall treat’ shall be replaced by ‘Each Member State with a derogation shall treat’;
(b) the words ‘of the European Monetary System (EMS) and in developing the ecu, and shall respect existing powers in this field’ shall be replaced by ‘of the exchange-rate mechanism.’.
***
Renumbering
The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) table of equivalences confirms that the new Article 118b TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon was to be renumbered Article 142 TFEU in the consolidated version, under the title ‘Economic and monetary policy’, renumbered Title VIII, and in the renumbered Chapter 5 ‘Transitional provisions’ (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/215).
(In the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115, the Tables of equivalences start on page 361, but the ToL numbers have been omitted.)
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty: TFEU
A readable Article 142 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/110:
Part Three Union policies and internal actions
Title VIII Economic and monetary policy
Chapter 5 Transitional provisions
Article 142 TFEU
(ex Article 124(1) TEC)
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, Member States shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
We notice that Article 142 TFEU repeats the wording of Article III-94 of the draft Constitution and Article III-200 of the Constitutional Treaty almost exactly. Only ‘it’ remains ‘Member States’ as in the current Article 124(1) TEC, second sentence.
***
Sweden
Even if Sweden is one of the EU member states with a derogation, the most artificial one at that, I found nothing about Article 118b TFEU (ToL) in the Lisbon Treaty ratification bill of the Swedish government, Regeringens proposition 2007/08:168 Lissabonfördraget (3 July 2008).
Is common interest of no particular interest?
***
Priollaud and Siritzky
In ‘Le traité de Lisbonne ; Commentaire, article par article, des nouveaux traités européens (TUE et TFUE)’ (La Documentation Française, 2008), François-Xavier Priollaud and David Siritzky present the Lisbon Treaty provisions of Chapter 5 (Dispositions transitoires) on page 260 to 261. Their characterization of Articles 141 to 144 TFEU is succinct:
« Les art. 141 à 144 TFUE comprennent les dispositions applicables aux États membres faisant l’objet d’une dérogation, sans changement notable. »
***
United Kingdom FCO
‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon (Cm 7311, 21 January 2008) offers the following comment on Article 142 TFEU (on page 13):
“Draws on and updates Article 124(1) TEC.”
***
UK House of Commons Library
The UK House of Commons Library presented the amending treaty in ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Communities’ (Research paper 07/86, 6 December 2007. There was a short explanation of Article 118b TFEU (ToL), on page 64:
“Article 118(b) (Constitution Article III-200) largely corresponds with present Article 124(1) on the exchange rate policy of Member States with a derogation.”
***
Common interest
Naturally, materials on amending treaties, such as the Treaty of Lisbon, tend to concentrate on the substantial changes. Still, it is notable that ‘common interest’ seems to raise no interest at all among our government and parliament sources.
***
ERM II
For a closer look, you have to turn to the European Central Bank and the national central banks. Here are a few introductory pointers:
Exchange-rate cooperation and the exchange-rate mechanism (ERM II) are outlined in the Agreement of 16 March 2006 between the European Central Bank and the national central banks of the Member States outside the euro area laying down the operating procedures for an exchange rate mechanism in stage three of Economic and Monetary Union (2006/C 73/08), published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ) 25.3.2006 C 73/21, since amended.
The ERM II Agreement contains provisions concerning the national central banks of all the non-euro area member states, but especially with regard to the countries participating in the ERM II.
The amending Agreement of 21 December 2006 (Slovenia out of ERM II when adopting the euro, Bulgaria and Romania in) was published in the OJ 20.1.2007 C 14/6 and the amending Agreement of 14 December 2007 (Cyprus and Malta out of ERM II on joining the euro) in the OJ 29.12.2007 C 319/17.
A corresponding amendment concerning Slovakia is to be expected.
For an accessible overview, you can go to the Scadplus web page Exchange rate mechanism (ERM II) between the euro and participating currencies (last update 22 March 2007):
http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l25082.htm
Ralf Grahn
The EU Treaty of Lisbon updates the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), by taking into account the establishment of the eurozone and the experiences within the exchange-rate mechanism (ERM II).
***
Current treaty
The current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) sets out Transitional provisions in Chapter 4 of Title VII Economic and monetary policy, in Part Three Community policies (in the latest codified version of the treaties, Official Journal 29.12.2006 C 321 E/93─101)
Chapter 4 Transitional provisions contains Articles 116 to 124 TEC.
***
Exchange-rate policy as a common interest
Article 124 TEC (ex Article 109m) set out the exchange-rate policy of each member state as a matter of common interest before the beginning of the third stage of economic and monetary union (EMU), when the single currency, the euro, replaced the national exchange-rate policies of the member states which adopted the euro. Article 124 TEC continues to apply ‘by analogy’ to the member states with a derogation, i.e. outside the eurozone:
Article 124 TEC
1. Until the beginning of the third stage, each Member State shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, Member States shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the European Monetary System (EMS) and in developing the ecu, and shall respect existing powers in this field.
2. From the beginning of the third stage and for as long as a Member State has a derogation, paragraph 1 shall apply by analogy to the exchange-rate policy of that Member State.
***
Draft Constitution
The euro currency had been introduced, and the euro banknotes and coins were in circulation, when the European Convention deliberated institutional reform of the European Union. It is hardly surprising that the Convention proposed a reworked section with the aim to simplify and to clarify the transitional provisions.
Section 4 Transitional provisions comprises Articles III-91 to III-96 of the draft Constitution (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/45─46).
Article III-94 of the draft Constitution updated Article 124 TEC to take account of the introduction of the euro, which had left only three of the fifteen existing member states outside the euro area (Denmark, the United Kingdom and Sweden), but with twelve new member states set to join the European Union in the so called big bang enlargement:
SECTION 4
Transitional provisions
Article III-94 Draft Constitution
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, it shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
Finland
The Finnish government reported on the results of the European Convention in Valtioneuvoston selonteko Eduskunnalle konventin tuloksista ja valmistautumisesta hallitusten väliseen konferenssiin (VNS 2/2003 vp). Finland had adopted the euro. A section discussed economic and monetary policy (8.5 Talous. ja rahapolitiikka) on pages 65 to 67, but I found nothing specific about Article III-94 of the draft Constitution.
***
Sweden
Ahead of the intergovernmental conference, the Swedish government presented its views in a memorandum, Regeringens skrivelse 2003/04:13 Europeiska konventet om EU:s framtid (2 October 2003).
Sweden had not negotiated an opt-out from the treaty obligation to introduce the euro currency, but still the government had arranged a referendum on the adoption. The negative referendum result, which left Sweden in legal limbo, was fresh.
If the updated Article III-94 of the draft Constitution had little direct significance for Finland, Sweden on the contrary retained a national exchange-rate policy and a treatment of the ‘common interest’ would not have been out of place.
In spite of this, I found no specific mention of draft Constitution Article III-94 in the memorandum.
***
de Poncins
Étienne de Poncins presented the text of Article III-94 in Vers une Constitution européenne (Éditions 10/18, 2003), page 315, without comment.
***
Common interest?
Not one comment from the three sources checked; is this an indication of the significance of matters defined as common interests?
***
Constitutional Treaty
The transitional EMU provisions of the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2004) are found in Section 5 Transitional provisions, comprising Articles III-197 to 202 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/86─90).
The exchange-rate policies as matters of common interest were mentioned in Article III-200:
Article III-200 Constitution
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, it shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
Let us see it our standard references are more informative concerning the signed Constitutional Treaty, than they were with regard to the draft Constitution.
***
Sweden
The government of Sweden, still outside the eurozone as a member state with a derogation, offered a short and bland description of the aims of economic and monetary union (EMU) in the draft ratification bill, Lagrådsremiss Fördraget om upprättande av en konstitution för Europa (2 June 2005), page 171:
.
”Den ekonomiska och monetära unionen (EMU) är ett samarbete inom EU som syftar till att samordna medlemsländernas ekonomiska politik och att införa en gemensam valuta. EMU har genomförts i tre etapper. Den sista etappen inleddes 1999 och innebär en fullbordad valutaunion med gemensam centralbank (Europeiska centralbanken) samt gemensam valuta och penningpolitik. En förutsättning för valutaunionen har varit och är att de deltagande ländernas ekonomier befinner sig på ungefär samma nivå. Ett antal ekonomiska krav som ett land måste uppfylla för att få delta i valutaunionen har därför ställts upp, de s.k. konvergenskriterierna. För att säkerställa sunda offentliga finanser inom unionen har därför EU inrättat den s.k. stabilitets- och tillväxtpakten.”
The Swedish government did not mention Article III-200 of the Constitution specifically, although Sweden through its national central bank (Sveriges Riksbank) has a national exchange-rate policy, defined as a common interest for the European Union as a whole.
***
Finland
In Finland, the government’s ratification bill, Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan perustuslaista tehdyn sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta (HE 67/2006 vp), mentioned Article III-200 of the Constitution on page 185. The government remarked that Article III-200 corresponds with Article 124 TEC without substantial change:
”III-200 artikla, joka koskee valuuttakurssipolitiikkaa niiden maiden osalta, joissa euroa ei ole otettu käyttöön, vastaa asiasisällöltään SEY 124 artiklaa.”
***
Original Lisbon Treaty
In Article 2, point 104, of the original Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) updated Article 124 TEC by adopting the Convention and Constitution proposals, but the amendments were inserted in the ‘usual’, i.e. unreadable manner adopted by the IGC 2007 (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/79):
104) An Article 118b shall be inserted, with the wording of Article 124(1); it shall be amended as follows:
(a) the words ‘Until the beginning of the third stage, each Member State shall treat’ shall be replaced by ‘Each Member State with a derogation shall treat’;
(b) the words ‘of the European Monetary System (EMS) and in developing the ecu, and shall respect existing powers in this field’ shall be replaced by ‘of the exchange-rate mechanism.’.
***
Renumbering
The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) table of equivalences confirms that the new Article 118b TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon was to be renumbered Article 142 TFEU in the consolidated version, under the title ‘Economic and monetary policy’, renumbered Title VIII, and in the renumbered Chapter 5 ‘Transitional provisions’ (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/215).
(In the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115, the Tables of equivalences start on page 361, but the ToL numbers have been omitted.)
***
Consolidated Lisbon Treaty: TFEU
A readable Article 142 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/110:
Part Three Union policies and internal actions
Title VIII Economic and monetary policy
Chapter 5 Transitional provisions
Article 142 TFEU
(ex Article 124(1) TEC)
Each Member State with a derogation shall treat its exchange-rate policy as a matter of common interest. In so doing, Member States shall take account of the experience acquired in cooperation within the framework of the exchange-rate mechanism.
***
We notice that Article 142 TFEU repeats the wording of Article III-94 of the draft Constitution and Article III-200 of the Constitutional Treaty almost exactly. Only ‘it’ remains ‘Member States’ as in the current Article 124(1) TEC, second sentence.
***
Sweden
Even if Sweden is one of the EU member states with a derogation, the most artificial one at that, I found nothing about Article 118b TFEU (ToL) in the Lisbon Treaty ratification bill of the Swedish government, Regeringens proposition 2007/08:168 Lissabonfördraget (3 July 2008).
Is common interest of no particular interest?
***
Priollaud and Siritzky
In ‘Le traité de Lisbonne ; Commentaire, article par article, des nouveaux traités européens (TUE et TFUE)’ (La Documentation Française, 2008), François-Xavier Priollaud and David Siritzky present the Lisbon Treaty provisions of Chapter 5 (Dispositions transitoires) on page 260 to 261. Their characterization of Articles 141 to 144 TFEU is succinct:
« Les art. 141 à 144 TFUE comprennent les dispositions applicables aux États membres faisant l’objet d’une dérogation, sans changement notable. »
***
United Kingdom FCO
‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon (Cm 7311, 21 January 2008) offers the following comment on Article 142 TFEU (on page 13):
“Draws on and updates Article 124(1) TEC.”
***
UK House of Commons Library
The UK House of Commons Library presented the amending treaty in ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Communities’ (Research paper 07/86, 6 December 2007. There was a short explanation of Article 118b TFEU (ToL), on page 64:
“Article 118(b) (Constitution Article III-200) largely corresponds with present Article 124(1) on the exchange rate policy of Member States with a derogation.”
***
Common interest
Naturally, materials on amending treaties, such as the Treaty of Lisbon, tend to concentrate on the substantial changes. Still, it is notable that ‘common interest’ seems to raise no interest at all among our government and parliament sources.
***
ERM II
For a closer look, you have to turn to the European Central Bank and the national central banks. Here are a few introductory pointers:
Exchange-rate cooperation and the exchange-rate mechanism (ERM II) are outlined in the Agreement of 16 March 2006 between the European Central Bank and the national central banks of the Member States outside the euro area laying down the operating procedures for an exchange rate mechanism in stage three of Economic and Monetary Union (2006/C 73/08), published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ) 25.3.2006 C 73/21, since amended.
The ERM II Agreement contains provisions concerning the national central banks of all the non-euro area member states, but especially with regard to the countries participating in the ERM II.
The amending Agreement of 21 December 2006 (Slovenia out of ERM II when adopting the euro, Bulgaria and Romania in) was published in the OJ 20.1.2007 C 14/6 and the amending Agreement of 14 December 2007 (Cyprus and Malta out of ERM II on joining the euro) in the OJ 29.12.2007 C 319/17.
A corresponding amendment concerning Slovakia is to be expected.
For an accessible overview, you can go to the Scadplus web page Exchange rate mechanism (ERM II) between the euro and participating currencies (last update 22 March 2007):
http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l25082.htm
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
Article 142 TFEU,
common interest,
derogation,
EMU,
ERM II,
EU,
EU Law,
European Union,
exchange rate,
monetary policy,
TEC,
TFEU
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)