Institutional organization

José Manuel Barroso © European Communities, 2009

The European Commission’s work programme »Time to act« proves to be highly ambitious and announces a range of new regulatory initiatives.

The programme comprises a total of four areas for action, 34 strategic priorities as well as 280 further proposals. The action areas are: tackling the crisis and sustaining Europe’s social
market economy, building a citizens’ agenda, modernising instruments and ways of working, and developing an external agenda.

In order to put flesh on the bones of the Commission presented by the Commission »Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth«, communications are announced to address the issues it raises. Insofar as a first idea of the content can be deduced from the short description of the initiatives, this usually goes in the direction of more state intervention as well as restriction of market forces. Only a few of these initiatives are assessed below, by way of examples.

In the framework of the EU flagship initiative »An industrial policy for a globalised era«, the Commission wants to steer the economic restructuring process in a forward-looking direction
with a spectrum of state regulation instruments. In the social market economy system, the state should not presume to intervene with a view to steering economic structural change. No politician or official can predict better than companies and entrepreneurs investing their own money which investments and technologies are »forward-looking« and which are not. The task of the state lies in supporting an economic structural change through conducive framework conditions without prescribing its direction. Any social hardships which arise as a result should be cushioned by the state in a way that does not impede change.

Following the spectacular failure of the Copenhagen climate conference, preparation of a legislative initiative to increase the EU emission reduction target beyond 20 percent shows at the
very least that the European Commission has lost some of its grip on reality. The intended creation of an EU civil law infringes the principle of subsidiarity and is rejected by the German business community as superfluous.

Also misguided is the announced legislative initiative on revision of the posting of workers directive. Improved implementation of this directive is sensible and necessary. However, current deficiencies in the practical transposition, implementation and enforcement of the posting of workers directive can be better removed through closer cooperation between the member states, national administrations and the European Commission on the exchange of good practice and control instruments.

The planned proposal for a directive on work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) also follows a completely wrong approach. With no sound scientific justification, the Commission
assumes that the causes of MSD are primarily work-related. Yet, a demarcation between work-related MSD and MSD developed in the private sphere is not possible. Instead of a proposal for a directive, the EU should be targeting promotion of a Europe- wide exchange of experience on successful examples of company practice.

Nevertheless, the 2010 work programme contains some rays of light. For instance, the Competition Directorate-General’s controversial initiative on introduction of collective redress is to be reassessed. New environmental directives will enable state aid for energy-intensive businesses whose international competitiveness is affected by “indirect costs” caused by the revised
European emission trading directive.

Positive effects can be expected from the communication on the relaunch of the single market. But it is essential to prevent support being given to new and unnecessary regulation in the
areas of social affairs, consumer protection and environmental protection.