In 1997 soon after Labour romped into power in the UK it looked like nothing could shake the dominance of socialists and social democrats in Europe. The left was in government in 13 of the 15 member states and was dominant in the European parliament, council and commission. It was to be but a brief interlude. By 1999 we had lost our majority in the parliament and over the next few years the majority in council, so that by 2005 the left was in a minority in all three institutions. The accession of 10 new member states just cemented a trend that was already in progress.
Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, former Danish Prime Minister and now President of the Party of European Socialists (PES), set himself the task of reversing this decline. When Poul Nyrup – a larger than life figure with a passion for progressive politics – launched a wide ranging consultation with trade unionists, civil society groups and sister parties on what should be in the PES’s Euro Manifesto, many of us doubters thought that it would end in tears, and so it looked for much of the time. The initial consultation produced an interminable list of largely unachievable demands. Worst still, a number of sectors had not responded, which left some significant gaps in the consultation documents.
By September a first draft was ready for a initial discussion by the PES’s 45 sister parties. Calling the document “Time for Change” might have been a winner in many EU countries, in view of the prevailing political winds, but comrades readily accepted that it might not be the cleverest of messages for the British electorate. The alternative “Let’s Take Europe Back” was great in French, but gained unhelpful connotations in translation. The Labour team would have wanted a message which reflected our “fairness” agenda, and it was agreed that “People First, A New Direction for Europe” was as good a slogan as we were going to get. By November compromises were reached and all sister parties were able to sign up to the text.
“People First” is built around six major policy areas. The economy; a fair deal for women and men; making Europe a leader in the fight against global climate change; developing an effective answer to the challenge of migration; championing gender equality; and developing Europe’s role as a partner for peace, security and development.
The manifesto is a clarion call against a ‘do nothing’ Europe. Rasmussen was one of the first in Europe to identify the problems caused by “regulation light” financial markets. “People First” therefore calls for tighter regulation of the markets and for the creation of a European Employment Pact for more, better and greener jobs. The PES want all EU policies to be assessed in terms of their impact on jobs, accelerated investment projects to create new jobs and greater investment in lifelong learning to improve the employability of workers. The PES would also like to expand the Erasmus Programme, which has given so many students the opportunity to study abroad, in order to benefit a much greater number of young people.
The European Trade Union Congress won a commitment to rectify a number of cross border labour rights problems identified by recent judgements of the European Court of Justice. More controversially for some, the PES proposes to end the opt-out on the Working Time Directive. The PES wants to put a cap on the average weekly working time at 48 hours, whilst the UK and many new member states are arguing that this is inappropriate to do so when workers might want to maximise their income to cope with the current global recession. The matter is somewhat academic as it will have been resolved, one way or the other, by the time of the elections on June 4th.
The trade unions have also been campaigning for a European framework on public services and for a framework on cross border collective bargaining. There will be problems with both. The definition of what is a public service and the different ways these are organised across the Union will ensure this will be a very long debate and the outcome is far from certain. There may be no difficulty in defining cross border collective bargaining, but it is sure that agreement, even within our political family, will be difficult to reach.
Herein lies one of the problems with the manifesto. At the heart of it there continues to be a debate on the left about the correct level of regulation to create a fair, prosperous and enterprising society. The manifesto group touched upon finding a resolution, but perhaps wisely decided to leave the debate to develop for a while longer.
I was sad that our attempt to campaign to end the European parliament’s monthly travelling circus to Strasbourg was blocked by our French comrades. Not that the parliament could change that decision. Unfortunately it was John Major, at the 1992 Edinburgh Summit, who agreed that our monthly peregrinations are set in the Treaties of the European Union. To change this will require a unanimous decision of the council. We may well ponder what pressure could be put on France to make them forfeit their veto on this bit of Gallic pride.