Sweden: The Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs, and Rapkay’s draft report
From: Nielsen, Dan
Sent the 7th July 2006 at 14:12
To: ’Lars.wohlin@telia.com’; lars.wolin@europarl.europa.eu’
Subject: The Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs, and Rapkay’s proposal for a report
Dear Lars Wolin,
I write to you in your capacity as a member of the Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs on behalf of public service workers’ unions in Sweden belonging to EPSU - the European Federation of Public Service Unions(Kommunal, SEKO, ST, SSR, Vårdförbundet, Försvarsförbundet, Transport and SKTF). On Tuesday you are going to deal with and vote on the Committee’s report on the Commission’s White Paper on Services of General Interest.
The debate on Services of General Interest is of great importance for those of us in public sector trade unions in terms of future possibilities to organise, manage and monitor public services in Europe. Therefore the attitude and views of the European Parliament in these matters is also of paramount interest to us.
Public services cannot be considered to be the same as other types of service. It is not clear how the proposed Services Directive, including the new proposal which will soon be discussed once more by the European Parliament, will impact on the public services and the public sector. One reason for this is that the definitions of “Services of General Interest” and “Services of General Economic Interest” have not been sufficiently worked out and the grey area between these two kinds of services have not been thoroughly analysed. What we in Sweden understand as Services of General Interest may be viewed by the Commission as Services of General Economic Interest. It could mean that in Sweden many public services would have to be included in legislation on competition and government support in EU legislation. It is uncertain what this may mean for municipal self-determination and public services in Sweden.
On Tuesday or Wednesday you are going to consider the Draft Report (PE 372.142v01-00) on Services of General Interest (2005/2101(INI). In spite of the uncertainty as to whether the solution to the lack of clarity between competition and government control should become part of European legislation, we believe that Rapkay’s draft report is a good starting point. On the other hand this does not mean that we are against every single initiative proposed by the European Union in this field.
The following issues are, however, important for us (we quote from Rapkay’s draft report and from the amendments received):
the principle of subsidiarity is retained so that “member states and their local authorities” themselves may “determine which services are covered by the expression ‘services of general interest’ and which is the best method of administering them” (Rapkay item D).
the aim of a successful conclusion of the single market should be to introduce effective and efficient ‘services of general interest’, whilst fully respecting their areas of responsibility and without limiting the freedom of local and regional authorities to determine and apply their own priorities in terms of the quality, frequency, price controls and availability of services (amendment 32).
in the European Treaty on basic rights access to services of general economic interest is acknowledged and respected in order to promote social and territorial cohesion in the Union (amendment 84).
A total of 235 amendments have been received. We believe that the vast majority in no way improve Rapkay’s draft report. On the contrary a number of them seek to make the text obscure and often lay it open to misinterpretation. This is true, for instance, of amendments 14, 17, 23 and 26 and virtually all the proposals to remove whole items or paragraphs. It serves no purpose to go through all 235 amendments. Instead we will highlight a few amendments for which we would encourage support. At the top of this list are amendments 10 (and alternatively 11), 16, 32, 84, 110, 125, 190, 207 and 218, also 13, 37, and in principle 38 although it is not clear what is demanded in terms of European regulation, 41, 78 and 79 which clarify the text, 86 and 87, 95 and 96, 183 and 225.
Whilst not being sure that more European legislation and regulation is the answer to our problems (see above) we agree with the ideas in amendments 111 and 112, but still think they should not be voted for, given that they stop the important debate on ‘services of general interest’ and the differences between those and ‘services of general economic interest’. This is a debate we must engage in at a national and at EU level.
We would encourage support for amendment 142, although not on the present basis, i.e. the Commission’s Communication on Social Services of General Interest suggesting that the Commission should make proposals for regulations or similar. We cannot therefore support amendment 143 and any others either, which propose legislating for specific sectors, 147 and 149 as a result of support for amendment 142. As we see it social services are a national responsibility.
Given that we are not sure that more European legislation and regulation is the answer to our problems (see above) we agree with the ideas in amendments 111 and 112, but still think they should not be voted on, given that they impede the important debate on “services of general interest” and the differences between them and “services of general economic interest”. This is a debate that should be engaged in at national and EU level.
We would encourage support for amendment 142, although not on its present basis, i.e. the Commission’s Communication on Social Services of General Interest, asking that the Commission make proposals for regulation or similar. We cannot therefore support amendment 143 and others either, which propose legislating for specific sectors, 147 and 149 as a result of support for amendment 142. As we see it social services are a national responsibility.
This is a long letter, but the matter is important to us. I hope you will be able to make use of it in your work.
Thank you for giving me your time
I would, of course, like to discuss the matter and develop our views. Please do not hesitate to get in touch with me on the phone number below.
Best regards
Dan Nielsen
International Secretary, SKTF
Kungsgatan 28A
Box 7825
S 103 97 Stockholm
Tel. (Switchboard) +46 (0) 8 789 6300
Tel. direct line +46 (0) 8 789 6317
Mobile +46 70 318 6317
About us