The EU and social protection: what should the European Convention propose?

Download fulltext

econstor www eu Der Open-Access-Publikationsserver der ZBW – Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft The Open Access Publication Server of the Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Nutzungsbedingungen: Die räumt Ihnen als Nutzerin/Nutzer das unentgeltliche räumlich unbeschränkte und zeitlich auf die Dauer des Schutzrechts beschränkte einfache Recht ein ausgewählte Werk im Rahmen unter → http://www eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen nachzulesenden vollständigen Nutzungsbedingungen zu vervielfältigen mit denen Nutzerin/der Nutzer sich durch erste Nutzung einverstanden erklärt Terms use: grants you user non-exclusive right to use selected work free charge territorially unrestricted and within time limit term property rights according terms specified at By first agrees declares comply with these zbw Vandenbroucke Frank Working Paper EU social protection: What should European Convention propose? MPIfG working paper No 02/6 Provided in Cooperation with: Max Planck Institute Study Societies Suggested Citation: (2002) : This Version is available at: http://hdl handle net/10419/44291 June 2002 Social Protection: Should Propose? Minister Affairs Pensions Belgian Federal Government[1] based on a public lecture held 17 Contents Introduction 1 Role Play Development Protection Policy? Diminished Legal Authority Through Market Compatibility Requirements 2 Autonomy Due de facto Pressures Welfare States 3 Common Objectives Legitimate Diversity Post-Lisbon Challenge: Turning Principles Co-operation Into Operational Practice Method Co-ordination as Creative Instrument Combating Poverty Promoting Inclusion Pensions: A Challenge With Financial Constraints 4 Mobile Citizens: Simplifying Improving Coordination Security Systems 5 Health Care Elderly 6 Legislative Agenda: Focus Delivery 7 Dialogue Anchoring Policy IGC: Six Proposals Including Charter Fundamental Rights Constitutional Treaty Statement EU’s Architecture Strengthening Provisions Facilitating Respecting Agreements Between Partners National Level Services General Interest Summary & Conclusion In this I will discuss two interrelated questions: (1) role if any Union (EU) play development policy? (2) Does proper we would define it when answering question require changes be made Treaty? If answer second positive forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) offer unique opportunity include desired new My discussion policy not exhaustive concentrate mainly protection thus going into employment related issues Nor relate how Member can maintain necessary funding programmes context “tax competition” nor debate future structural funds say that discussions are important quite contrary However my aim here examine impact typical national minister who responsible (including health care) what kind such like see develop now after part provide succinct concerning present brief survey agenda “social protection” ministers stands today suggest short-term proposals further which do presuppose show has gained some momentum since Lisbon Summit March 2000 but also remains politically institutionally fragile third elaborate six These questions raised post-Lisbon experience discussed order give coherent response assess facts: does protection? an excellent textbook policy-making Stephan Leibfried Paul Pierson summarize facts follows: “The process integration eroded both sovereignty (by mean legal authority) autonomy regulatory capacity) member states realm welfare remain primary institutions they so increasingly constraining multi-tiered polity “[2] addition direct pressures resulting from initiatives undertaken by dynamics market have created indirect jure through imposition compatibility requirements Court Justice (ECJ) forces economic competition integrated Direct or “negative reform” call occurs application fundamental freedoms provided Treaty: movement workers freedom services principle implies firstly State may no longer most benefits its citizens; secondly insist only apply territory enjoyed there; thirdly although still largely prevent other systems directly competing own regime built entirely able so; fourthly exclusive administer migrants’ claims closely linked fact treaties well secondary law focus activity entrepreneurial obviously: Do state constitute activity? financial general implying example governments exclusively decide Fortunately acknowledge non-economic true there exemption treaty’s distinction between “economic” “welfare” (or “solidarity”) always clear-cut Hence drawing – continually redrawing fine line “solidarity” much conflict judgements ECJ about outstanding report last year’s Presidency Professor Elias Mossialos[3] his team shown particular field care significant prospects substantial remoulding policies “market filter” As stress due insurance more characteristics” fragmented provider groups already operate markets (medical instruments pharmaceuticals) quasi-markets (doctors private practice sickness funds) countries been traditionally exposed provision Moreover reforms geared cures” de-regulation recent decades To extent move away redistribution solidarity clear beyond yet unidentified threshold become just another enterprise must compete competitors level playing [4] shows certainly simplistic blame “Europe” problems makers confronted enforced solutions upon reluctant matter instead asking “Do activity?” one could put forward slightly different question: “To believe organise their domestic actual consequences internal rules repeatedly illustrated rulings issued Let me Kohll[5] Decker[6] considered demanding prior authorization reimbursement orthodontic treatment purchase spectacles outside Luxembourg had unjustified impediment goods Consequently security system was forced reimburse unauthorised Even though explain later were nuanced than thought (Section 2) did make again even competence exempt Kohll Decker create dual cover care: On hand procedure governed EC regulation coordination (Regulation 1408/71 refer Section 4) Regulation integrates patient received her institution where he receives medical “as insured it” subject same cost sharing regulations (e g referral specialist costs settled tariffs delivered persons temporarily “members” host country’s patients using returning country residence claim coverage home there” conditions applicable [7] duality creates complexity scope confusion poses problem traditional allows (conditioned) mobility preserves cohesion introduces degree unlimited disrupt Thus might lead increasing inequalities access comes guaranteeing quality essential objectives generally want achieve increased intrinsically problematic number reasons very developed framework For instance allow centres excellence especially highly specialised treatments experimental therapies; reap full cross-border cooperation projects; tangible difficulties nature crucial practical illustrate Suppose UK citizens entitled anywhere Europe Belgium without NHS having Mobility opportunities government citizens: immediate solution waiting lists whilst extra investment currently undertaking takes produce results; far consider contracting-out sector transparent well-organised price British providers rest beneficial (since supply increased) entails risks risk uncontrollable bill (as cannot monitor cost-efficiency abroad) potential regard given asymmetry information characterizes From point view revenue But simultaneously “Kohll Decker” type fuel “two-speed” treated “free” (that conforming convention tariffs) Indeed growing influx abroad nourish “non-convention” One imagine interactions X decided semi-privatise approach favour privatisation neighbouring words is: Will offering respect built-in our simply export each other? De result enhanced single budgetary promoted avoid cheap talk dumping EU” Intensifying many challenges facing Today under strain primarily because (a) fields pensions greater resources (b) needs emerged Furthermore know necessarily retrenchment led renewed agreements partners consequently rethinking rather Nevertheless naïve extrapolate [8] Economic monetary importance capital labour leave bigger mark architecture long run short eve enlargement history written When jury out theory issue economists recognised dangers leading loss tax base (perhaps competition”) consequential effects capacity finance Pressure follow-up States’ Broad Guidelines multilateral surveillance assessment situation annual stability plans sure recognizing political processes pressure means considerable attention sound finances swept carpet sustainable conditio sine qua non evidently major ageing societies prudence carries danger myopically economises investments exception observation Intelligent needed reasons: expectations today’s (a concern sensitive elections); prepare reality It case “straightforward” shift lightens burdens few substantive tricky equity justice less [9] accompanied Whilst (and rightly so) comparatively little intelligent sober together uncontroversial points conclusions Firstly seems fair lost control over face transferred authority latter gap steering combination diminished continued weakness developing responses restrict innovative everywhere common elderly pension demographic exacerbated requirement unanimity Council areas paralysis decision-making probably importantly bring dramatic increases politico-cultural politico-institutional heterogeneity among [10] Secondly service organisations constellation prioritise polarised trajectories fear: core components (redistribution pay-as-you-go etc ) “intervention-free” “pure” welfare; functions market-based (in whole parts) tilt towards sphere “economic action” becoming principles regimes Thereby gradually submerged “security” personal [11] There well-known (information adverse selection why easy twins neither argue below followed cautious path sufficient nuances prerequisites Yet unfair choose rely quasi-market mechanisms emphasized 1) provides robust guarantee against feared opinion institutional creating difficult exclude agenda: tidy separation belonging supranational spheres unsustainable “[12] additional transfer competencies uniformity let alone harmonisation sake Although concept “a model” makes sense “common ” think possibly agree detailed blueprint Fritz Scharpf argues attempt override legitimate diversity imposing uniform blow apart illegitimate; itself legitimating structure beliefs practices supporting multilevel [13] legislation domain decision making efficient section responsibility municipalities regions nation enable “active states” encourage indicating broad concerned And sustain operational synonymous competences inspired half 2001 Our leitmotiv agreed building done French Swedish Presidencies Portuguese “Lisbon principles” them hinged idea (economic performance mutually reinforcing equilibrium found) methodological proposal coined “open method coordination” moreover precise ambition “leadership” co-ordination: intended enhance coordinating attempted reduce virtually (ECOFIN) take concerns account drafting [14] “to implement Lisbon” implied three goals: co-operation fight poverty exclusion operational; launch open co-ordination pensions; ground reforming current governing schemes mobile 1408/71) [15] priority belongs “hard law”; belong “soft law” notion Next achieved inclusion sections indicate touch briefly address play: dialogue Together Part description sets scene [16] foundations Europewide formally laid down Before EU-level applied (multilateral 1992 Maastricht Treaty) (the Luxemburg formalised 1997 Amsterdam “co-ordinated strategy employment” fine-tuned year) follows distinguish “policy co-ordination” established before formal basis exists defined however “cookbook” soft-law methodologies often conflated heading [17] nutshell peer review action enables compare learn respects local diversity; flexible aims promote progress An learning requires comparable commonly indicators goals evaluation soft recommendations Commission exchange reliable least institutionalising mimicking” [18] Because pragmatic “open” effectively found way credible commitment sending messages explicit formulation seen “defensive shield” possible light unification added value goes being technical preventing Defining merely useful technique us translate abstract “European set rooted thanks interpreted definitions outcomes Echoing Anton Hemerijck [19] cognitive normative tool “cognitive” restricted extends underlying views opinions area “normative” embody paradigm fixed recipe methodology (see differs Employment Process Art 128 (In submitted every year individual States) differ turn inclusion: consists fairly four years yearly update integrate drawn up cookbook contains various recipes lighter heavier ones Elsewhere emphasised bear certain key mind [20] amongst others We fly wing need namely legislative Therefore replace confuse Confusing elements spirit subsidiarity lack clarity leads biased analysis [21] “comprehensiveness”: all tools [22] fourth choice benchmarks practice: standards realistic ambitious definitely best process: feasible “standards excellence” mediocrity fifth final located measure quantifiable reason finding agreement top litmus test readiness engage Anyone paid lip Related statistical “soft” character met scepticism consensus go solemn vague declarations Summits Admittedly results (mutatis mutandis) comprehensive whether actually meet high mid-term July Communication evaluate assessments “there doubt whatsoever modified guidelines […] brought innovations branches levels evolved introduction Action Plans 1998 conclude “convergence stress” real indicated highlight varied critical representative criticism produced gives rise increase sometimes irrelevant measures efficiency notably Parliament relation democratic gains “openness” too absence involvement deficit constitutes Europe’s prepared change balance undesirable detrimental Not proven usefulness; instrument either effective envisage therefore emphasising panacea magic formula intelligently managed defensive employ judiciously proactive creative Europe” specific anchor firmly collective good heart Eradicating promoting constituted ambitions December reached beginning called submit end able: adopt joint containing recommendations” policies; 18 quantitative [23] They accurately evolution multidimensional covers dimensions exclusion: education known “low income rate” percentage individuals living households total household 60 per cent median income; indicates “risk poverty” Other are: rate “persistent low income”; educational attainment; regional cohesion; people jobless households; proportion early school leavers training; self-perceived status level; longterm long-term unemployed; approve four-year programme launched January stimulating NGO’s scientists socially excluded “round” implemented fully During Danish Nice limited mainstreaming gender setting targets possibility target(s) appreciate engaged bilateral accession summer onwards start preparing reports “Joint Memoranda” (JIM’s) ready immediately members Committee soon place implementation adapt feasibility entrenchment Regarding Councils Laeken Barcelona 11 [24] adequacy sustainability modernisation changing societal explicitly wanted encompassing [25] perspective institutionalised including ECOFIN request speak balanced voice indeed reflected objective “ensure older placed enjoy decent standard living; share well-being accordingly participate actively cultural life According sixth “reform appropriate ways taking overall maintaining At fiscal reduction debt Strategies adopted dedicated reserve required frameworks management funded affordability portability draft Strategic Report September efforts Finally assessing monitoring 2003 Italian Still next those Greece Italy ensure truly negotiations aimed successfully striking formations unacceptable (provided hands deviate requests Heads Government regarding requested Göteborg asked incorporate Notwithstanding intentions sufficiently reflect that: central co-ordinated mix reflects articulation so-called triangle involve giving recognition safe effect “greater cohesion” “[26] happens “moment truth” Free cornerstones enshrined determining factors administrative barriers affect 1971 Ministers guarantees moving retain While affords ample numerous amendments That proceed simplification improvement basic options (so-called “parameters”) modernising Spanish (3 2002) provisions determine matters material (Who covered? apply?) aggregation periods equal determination competent “which applies”?) continue chapters things find mechanism extension (EEC) third-country nationals Such strong support purpose Until situation: daughter Moroccan employee France study London Her father thirty loses child benefit despite faithfully paying contributions Last apparently trivial nationals; United Kingdom Ireland join “opt in” Thirdly near Thanks opt exaggeration represents milestone equality non-EU diminish contribute establishment quickly deliver obligatory non-binding dossier identified eligible applying Since challenge compounded adequate spring launching careful “doing something” referred justify preparation form Ideally trilateral (yet created) interesting input Committees involved accessibility main advisory get started IGC forget round Agenda (December 2000) then encompassed amount policy) Having said engaging crystal ball gazing unlikely significantly unsuccessful Just examples: Directives consultation companies[27] acquis differences transposing prospect solid imply enormous sustained delivery Clearly carried existing acts saw revision updating insolvency[28] exposure asbestos[29] men women employment[30] Within remit falls ever regulated earlier Directive temporary work[31] recently presented Negotiations vibrations[32] noise[33] activities occupational retirement close rounded successfully[34] (bipartite) interprofessional sectoral (tripartite) wide range Those success bipartite bargaining employers trade unions 27 sectors binding Others referring negotiation infancy “Val Duchesse dialogue” 1985 progressed stage mere furthermore primacy channels Despite removed handling industrial relations: declaration expressed willingness jointly multi-annual improve tripartite aspects urged strategies Strategy summit several occasions grant triggered themselves prove willing players arguments amending facilitate starting plays concluded active underscores depends answers (such organisation mobility) lacks pursued improved window propositions text argument concrete First constitutional (basic) essence constitution widespread content legally entitlements horizontal thereby indication production More insertion taken emphasizing particularly famous cases caused stir throughout stated special remove ambit [35] Now course defines limits took consideration tipped sought pair financing [36] Rulings Smits-Peerbooms clarified confirmed Community exercising power hospital fall Article 50 Community) maintenance restriction scheme justified derogates event non-discriminatory criteria advance circumscribe exercise authorities’ discretion used arbitrarily [37] undoubtedly tries weigh deciding applicability decisions clearer guidance direction Court’s Mossialos highest statement enshrines values diminishing shaping [38] incorporated balancing confine re-balancing act broaden clearly express dimension parcel strive reformulation Articles amend complete § deals promotion usefully jurisprudentiel formulated “In shall eliminate accessible financially organised Text Proposal reference completed consistency environmental All actions preserve via includes interpretation Agreement build mutual understanding specify details intergovernmental collaboration tends dependent coincidental moment ensuring valid hurdle overcome outcome formation Without glad hear sounds voices international bodies accustomed IMF World Bank 25 “peer review” complicated Practical maybe frequency) Given establish logical planned article describe Union’s features “generic” encompass (art 128) detail chapter [39] “generic definition” precaution involved: proposing “bottom line” types damage Whether generic definition venture myself specifically experiencing following requirements: applies field: (to signal domains indicated); unambiguously depend obligation (hence expression “shall”); prominent played ministers’ identity past years; (called “management labour” Treaty’s jargon); (it easier pensions); incorporation (for convenience “Broad Guidelines” today; broader Guidelines”) introduced 144 label “144bis”; reshape obviously presentation (article “144bis”) Regard 137 paragraph (j) (k) (*) pursuant consulting draw Reference establishing amended note proposed effect) suffices demands 136 formulations accepted independent holds meaning articles large subjects rule calls generalisation qualified majority voting (QMV) area; minimum minimorum QMV 1408/71; 42 am aware (current new) oblige competitive advantages compensation geographical stock disadvantages fear mentioning substantive: cumulative scientific evidence corroborated Dutch productive factor competitiveness institutional: finally abandon coalition supported easily block Rightly bad twist arms attach impose unacceptably unnecessary constraints serve source inspiration [40] argued simplify Treaty-based surrounding “declare binding/implement” whereas Most procedures relevant decisional initiated excludes pay Here great deal uncertainty arises parts allowed relating negotiate words: negotiations) Also helped declared 139 TEC “1 desire contractual relations accordance (sic) covered association strike lock-outs signatory parties except 137(3) unanimously Genreal refers affected 81 prohibits “all undertakings associations concerted object prevention distortion lot clarifications Albany compulsory affiliation “the seriously undermined [81](1) seeking similar reasoning 86 entrusted operation interest Recent “service purely considers “undertakings” function task system) regarded “undertakings 86(2) derogation case-law insert 81(1) pursuit equally seem Rules Applying Undertakings Insert provision: “Agreements Modify way: “Undertakings alternative delete read inquiry empirical decisionmaking politicoinstitutional illegitimate hope conceived table proposals: reformulate “horizontal” spell Fourthly Fifthly Notes thank (London School Economics) Anthony Atkinson (Nuffield College Oxford) Mario Telò (Institut d’Etudes Européennes Université Libre Bruxelles) Philippe Van Parijs (Chaire Hoover Catholic University Louvain) ideas contained during meetings seminars Brussels Oxford Anne Lancker Bart Vanhercke friends comments drafts Tom Puyenbroeck Christina Thomas editorial information: vandenbroucke com welcome addressed frank vandenbroucke@minsoc fed S P Left Courts Markets? In: Wallace H W Policy-Making Fourth Edition New Series Press p 268 E M McKee Palm B Karl F Marhold (forthcoming Law Character Peter Lang preceding paragraphs Pierson’s C-158/96 (1998) ECR I-1931 C-120/95 I-1831 J Nickless (2001) “Access healthcare Union: judgements” Eurohealth vol 7(1) pp 13-22 8 superficial developments time: witness ‘retrenchment’ ‘underprovision insurance’ contemporary states; Drèze synthesis “Economic Security: Economist 150(1) 1-18 9 Myles offers Esping-Andersen et al published Chapter G D Gallie Why state? 10 simulations gaps double poorest accounting 16% population average capita around 40% o c 283 12 13 Diversity: Integration Cahiers européens sciences po obstacles centred ‘legitimate diversity’ proposes Scharpf’s revised version of) ‘closer co-operation’ Title VII His ‘open co-ordination’ ‘framework directives’ sophisticated divisive thinks combining directives counterproductive 14 remarked Ferrera Matsaganis Sacchi “Open poverty: ‘Social process” Journal ‘leadership’ “Governance Rodrigues (ed Knowledge Economy Edward Elgar Cheltenham 15 goal Conclusions logically workforce 16 e La Porte C Ph Pochet (eds Building -Peter conflation ‘policy coordination’ confusing wrong sharply ‘generic’ mimicking Jelle Visser “contextualized” See Learning Mimicking: How Reform manuscript 19 model ‘cognitive’ ‘normative’ ‘The Self-transformation Model’ 20 “Sustainable ‘Open Co-ordination’ “Social Reflections Drèze’s Tinbergen Lecture 83-93 21 dominated comparative versus analyses tackle relative macroeconomic hypotheses bogged debates 22 mentioned lighten government’s burden intergenerational intragenerational ‘solved’ hence revisit pillars 23 (13509/01) thorough T Cantillon Marlier Nolan Indicators 24 Quality viability pensions: Joint methods (14098/01) endorsed Dec uneasy sworn enemies worst mistake “external” constraint affecting independently logic contrary: intragenerational) fairness precondition debate: jeopardised spending crowded taxes 26 “Opinion Committee” Recommendation Policies May Company PBEG 28 modification adapting transnational enterprises: employees employer fund wages 29 “Directive asbestos work” introducing maximum (eg demolition) 30 modifications (dating 1976) 31 agency (travail intérimaire) failure 32 safety arising physical agents (vibrations) 33 (noise) 34 “Vibrations” conciliation “Noise” Adoption likely (2nd 35 para 24; 36 40; 37 Mrs Smits-Geraets Parkinson’s disease she Germany Reimbursement refused grounds contracted claimant clinical offered German clinic superior Netherlands separate Mr Peerbooms neuro-stimulation therapy Innsbruck Austria reserves age recovered consciousness obtained consistent EU-law ‘normal’ construed appears tried tested science necessity undue delay arrangement person’s ‘undue delay’ completely noted lengthy times refusing 38 39 Ex 117 118 40 mentions “excluding laws States” “directives gradual hold back creation small medium-sized Copyright © publication reproduced transmitted permission writing author Jegliche Vervielfältigung Verbreitung auch auszugsweise bedarf Zustimmung Autors MPI für Gesellschaftsforschung Paulstr 50676 Köln MPIfG: mpifg de/pu/workpap/wp02-6/wp02-6 html [Zuletzt geändert 03 2007 11:00]