EPSU General Secretary presentation to the PES conference 19 September 2006
Party of European Socialists Conference on the future of public services
19 September 2006
Carola Fischbach-Pyttel, EPSU General Secretary
On behalf of John Monks, ETUC
The ETUC and EPSU very much welcome the initiative of the PES to come forward with a concrete legislative proposal on services of general interest. We may not always completely go along with each and every single word or formulation, but what is important here is the demonstration that it is possible to legislate on SGIs on the current Treaty basis, if there is the necessary political will. It is the political will that counts, the will to assume political responsibility in a positive, proactive way for public services, and not leave the area of SGI to the exclusive interpretation of the European Court of Justice. This is an important political signal to the Commission, who is, as you say, ‘completely enthralled with a narrow, neo-liberal agenda. Public services are not their priority.’ Well, we could not agree more. The battle around the draft services directive shows very clearly where the Commission is coming from.
EPSU has launched our initiative ‘quality public services - quality of life in April this year. Our clear objective is to obtain a horizontal legal framework on SGI / SGEI as a priority. A large number of our national campaign coordinators participate today in this conference. We attach great importance to this proposal. We think we can make this a joint rallying point in the ongoing debate about services of general interest and the European social model.
This is very necessary. The discussion and the voting in last week’s meeting on the Rapkay report has shown this quite drastically. We cannot cry victory at this stage at the outcome, but the door in favour of a horizontal framework on SGIs remains open. So I would say, congratulations on good tactical management and a fair portion of realpolitik. The spotlight is now on the vote in plenary. The question is: can we obtain clearer language? Can we actually obtain a reference to a ‘horizontal framework’? Hopefully we will be able to exert pressure on the undecided and produce some swing votes. This is an important message to all those who only call for subsidiarity and subsidiarity alone. EPSU very much suscribes to subsidiarity and local and regional government autonomy. But without specific EU laws protecting public services, the EU will continue to open-up public services to competition and when this is done, to strictly limit the public service obligations to the private operators. We therefore need EU action to strengthen and re-confirm local freedoms. Importantly the Rapkay report confirms the right to inhouse-production and the right of local government authorities to organise their services as they see fit. This is in our view also the most important article in the PES proposed legislation: ‘all competent authorities are free to choose how to manage a services of general economic interest and in particular to associate themselves with other competent authorities and decide whether to take on the direct operation of a service alone or with other competent authorities or to outsource its operation totally and partially.’
The priority of ETUC and EPSU is on a horizontal legal framework. This view we share with the CEEP and we are quite concerned with the current rush towards demands for further legal proposals on social services and on health services. Here, I have to admit we find the PES position not convincing. We find it very dangerous to argue in favour of sectoral directives on social services and on health services in the absence of a horizontal legal framework. Tactically, sectoral initiatives in these areas take away the justification for a transversal legal instrument. This campaign could easily become void of its purpose. Commissioner Kyprianou was extremely candid when he announced the plans of his services for the the health sector. He sees health as part of the internal market. People can shop around. He sees lucrative opportunities for private providers. We managed to keep health services out from the scope of the services directive, Kyprianou now seemingly wants to go for a similar approach again, but in a sectoral directive. Patient mobility needs to be regulated to take account of the ECJ rulings. We can agree with that. But what would be wrong with adapting the existing regulation 1408? What is very wrong, however, is to declare health care as a market to be financed perhaps on top of everything else, by collective health systems. It is very wrong also to put individual choice before improved general accessibility. We are worried that the Commission will come out with an extremely liberalising piece of legislation. Will we be able to sufficiently change its direction in the absence of a horizontal directive?
Let me be clear: We are not opposed to sectoral directives as such. But we very much agree with the statement contained in the introduction to your legislative proposal: ‘To safeguard services of general interest and put an end to legal uncertainty, Europe needs, without delay,... a general EU legal framework for public services, complementary to existing sectoral and national provisions, and introduced on the basis of joint decision-making with the European Parliament.
We value and generally support the PES proposal on SGIs. We want to give it the best of chances to become real. So I suggest to get our priorities right, let us campaign and work jointly for a legal framework first and foremost.
About us