Rhetoric alone is not enough for Europe. We need results and actions, which was certainly what Robert Schuman had in mind when he said that Europe would not be built at a stroke, but would be built upon concrete achievement. He probably had the plural in mind: concrete achievements. At the Spring Summit, we made several important institutional changes. For the first time, European social partners attended the summit. The President of the European Trade Union Confederation, Mr Méndez, and the President of UNICE, Mr Ernest-Antoine Seillière, took part in the discussions, as did the President of the European Central Bank for the first time. Mr Josep Borell, President of the European Parliament, also brought another important voice to the negotiating table, i.e. that of the European Parliament.
At the summit, we set ourselves a number of specific objectives. In the run-up, many of these objectives were very controversial, but we weren’t disheartened and laid down specific objectives with regard to jobs, growth and improving the employment situation for the 18 million people currently unemployed throughout Europe. In this regard, we want to concentrate on the national reform programmes and achieve higher employment growth of 1% per annum. This would mean an annual reduction of the jobless rate by 2 million, and create 10 million new jobs over the next five years. It is also our aim to focus our attention on young people. The aim is for 25% of young people to complete a higher-education course while reducing the number of early school leavers to 10%. Starting from next year, we want to offer every young person a job, an apprenticeship or the option of further education within 6 months. Subsequently, this period is to be reduced to 4 months. We also decided more intensive efforts in relation to gender equality in the workplace, and dealt with the issue of “flexicurity”. The Commission’s globalisation fund eas also mentioned as a sensible instrument for enabling workers who struggle with problems associated with globalisation to retrain or obtain further training.
How can this be achieved? We want to concentrate on SMEs, which have been paid little attention in the past. How can we make life easier for the 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises in Europe? For example, by cutting back on administrative processes and superfluous administrative regulations. Through its Better Regulation programme, which is modelled on the Dutch programme, the European Commission is offering very substantial and helpful support. We gave specific consideration to the fact that young entrepreneurs should be able to set up their businesses within one week. A single point of contact is to ensure that SMEs are not sent to hundreds of authorities but can start work as quickly as possible. At this point, I would also especially like to thank the Commission for its willingness to raise and double the “de minimis” threshold. This makes the provision of financial support for SMEs considerably easier. We are also making an additional EUR 30 billion available though the European Investment Bank for supported loans and guarantees so that SMEs can make their own contribution towards creating more jobs.
The third theme is know-how and research. Given our level of wages in Europe, we will be able to compete only if we do more in the area of research and know-how. Although this objective was already set in Europe in 2000, it was not adhered to. That is why we included an annex in the conclusions of the Spring Summit, by means of which every country can review its own commitments for achieving the aim of allocating 3% of its GDP to research expenditure by 2010. If we succeed, this will mean that EUR 100 billion can be invested in research every year. This is the greatest possible boast to increase growth.
Of special importance in this regard is that the Council supports the Commission’s idea for creating a European Institute for Technology. To begin with, this idea was greatly disputed by many Member States. Some feared that two streams of bureaucracy would be running in parallel, or that existing centres of excellence would come off second best. For my part, I fully supprt this idea. The EIT should represent a link between research and innovation, users, universities and the economy: in other words, not a super authority but a perfectly developed network. I wish to congratulate Mr José Manuel Barroso and the Commission on their idea and we await specific legislative proposals by June of this year.
At this point, I whould also like to make a brief reference to the budget. We have promised to devote substantially more funds, an additional EUR 800 million, to lifelong learning and exchange programmes. This is an interesting and important stimulus for young people. I have read various studies outlining the reasons why we have not yet achieved the Lisbon objectives. Too little “national ownership”, meaning that that too few people in Member States feel responsible. In Austria, therefore, we have set a good example and in the Council of Ministers this week appointed the Federal Minister for Labour and Economic Affairs as a political co-ordinator. I shall invite every Member State to follow this example so that the representatives in the Competitiveness Council can follow the implementation of our self-set objectives, so that our aims can become reality.
On the subject of energy policy:
At the Spring Summit, at my request, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel took on the introduction to this subject and I would like to thank her for doing so. At this point, however, I would also like to thank the British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, who started the ball rolling on this theme back in Hampton Court. January of this year was a wake-up call for us all, an alarm signal. In the early hours of 1 January, the Russians cut back their energy supplies by 30%, and then by a further 50% the following night. Together with the Commission, the Austrian Presidency was able to defuse this crisis in the early stages, but the problem continues to exist. Almost all producers live in areas of political crisis and we are faced with fluctuating raw material prices and too little diversification. At times, there is the risk of total blackout in Europe. We are faced with climate change and increased security risks. Everything just calls out for a new European show of strength. In this regard, the Commission has carried out some excellent preparatory work with its Green Paper. During the Spring Summit, we concentrated on three key areas: security of supply, competitiveness and environmental compatibility. As the first aim, we have stipulated a 20% energy saving potential for the coming years. This means that, for the first time, the Union will be seeking to decouple economic growth and energy consumption in a sustainable manner. In my view, this is one of the most important resolutions of this summit.
Furthermore, it is our aim to increase the proportion of renewable energies from 7% to 15%. Much needs to be done in order to achieve this aim. It is also our intention to raise the proportion of bio fuels from 2% to 8%. This will only come about with more research. Many partners are participating in this, including car manufacturers and the Cars 21 group. Raising the proportion of bio fuels also offers enormous opportunities for growth.
Another pount was cross-border trade in electricity, where it is our aim to achieve a 10% share between networks, which would also substantially reduce the risk of blackout. Pipelines, networks and power stations offer enormous economic potential, with investment in the region of EUR 800 to 1,000 billion, mostly private capital. Cleverly utilised, this could be an enormous driving force for jobs in Europe.
During the summit, we also debated another issue in a very calm, but intensive manner, i.e. that protectionism should have no place in Europe. The days when every country could create its own “national champion” are past. Markets must be opened up and we have therefore decided to also open up the markets for gas and electricity by 2007. To this end, the Commission has the instruments, and should also apply them. The Commission should make sure that security of supply is guaranteed for consumers.
I also wish to expressly point out, however, that responsibility for choosing the respective energy resource, i.e. the energy mix, remains a national matter. Each country has to know whether it wants nuclear power stations or not. Austria has its own and clear position on this matter and does not want to use nuclear power. This must be guaranteed.
However, we should not consider energy policy only from an economic viewpoint. It must also be viewed within the context of foreign policy. We have therefore called on the Commission, together with Mr Javier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, to submit a strategy paper on the foreign policy situation in relation to energy policy by June. With hindsight, these discussions and the decisions taken at the Spring Summit will be regarded as a breakthrough in terms of a genuine common European energy policy. We shall return to this topic every term.
Another very important theme of this summit was the Services Directive. I spent a great deal of time and effort convincing all Heads of State and Government that the summit should accept the European Parliament’s decision on the Services Directive which was democratically adopted, by a clear majority, at the first reading.
The Commission’s proposal, which was submitted yesterday, also corresponds to this decision by the European Parliament. I now ask that you speed up the process so that we can quickly come to a joint decision at second reading. I should also like to thank the European social partners, knowing that this compromise was difficult to accept, especially for the employers’ representatives. We have achieved a breakthrough with the Services Directive. We now need a similar commitment with the Working Time Directive. It is important that we also make progress here. We shall need to tread carefully to to address all national aprticularities. In any event, however, a sensible compromise is better than not achieving any solution.
In addition to the Services Directive and the Working Time Directive, the multi-annual budget represents real progress for the Union.
This is a seven-year budget, providing legal security for EU programmes. It also means that especially the new Member States will be able to implement what they are hoping for. Thank you for your understanding in terms of looking at the overall picture and not considering particular national interests. I, too, had to go beyond several of my own red lines during the negotiations. The Austrian Presidency, the Foreign Minister, the Finance Minister and myself were very committed in numerous and close contacts with governments, with Commission President Barroso, and also with the President of the European Parliament, Mr Josep Borell. We had to stick close to the December compromise. We were able to offer EUR 3.5 billion by way of new money, whereas the European Parliament wanted EUR 4 billion. In the end, the Commission came to our aid in the real sense of a “team” presidency, by making available EUR 500 million coming from restructuring. In this way, the European Parliament can receive its EUR 4 billion.
We shall raise an additional EUR 1 billion to strengthen the Common Foreign and Security Policy and EUR 5 billion for Lisbon strategy projects, half of which will come from the budget and half in cash from the EIB. Many things have been set in motion. We sincerely recommend that you accept the compromise. We have achieved something which we are absolutely able to justify to the outside world.
As regards foreign policy, I would still like to clarify a number of points. We have had to exercise a great deal of crisis management over recent months with regard to bird flu, the gas crisis and the dispute over the cartoons. Today, however, as I look across at Belarus’ opposition leader, Mr Alexander Milinkevich, on the rostrum, I would like to say a few words in relation to Belarus. Yesterday, I had the honour and the pleasure of holding a ling talk with Mr Milinkevich. He and the people of Belarus deserve every conceivable financial, economic and political support which should also, and above all, come from the political party families. Hundreds of individuals are in prison, workers have lost their jobs. Several countries, such as the Visegrád group, have got together and now offer grants for students who have lost their admission to study in Belarus. Together, we all have to raise our voices for these prisoners to be released, including Presidential candidate Kozulin. The European Union has no interest in isolating the Belarusian population. We will, however, keep up the restrictive measures against the regime for as long as is necessary, as long as authoritarian methods are employed.
Three months of our Presidency remain. This means a lot of work. I shall also continue to rely on close and beneficial contact and cooperation with the European Parliament. I trust that you will also continue to make a contribution, including a critical contribution, with your ideas and proposals. I promise my full cooperation. Through the Austrian Presidency, I still want to make further progress at Council level, without causing a stir, but with the emphasis on results. This is my programme and I believe we already have much to show for the first half of our Presidency.
Email Service
Accreditation
Hotel Reservation
Route Planner
Weather