Anger at treatment of elderly and disabled

Date: 26/06/1997

By Simon Coss

BONN's insistence on a voting procedure which effectively rules out Europe-wide action to help elderly and disabled people will alienate a significant section of the Union's population, Social Affairs Commissioner Pádraig Flynn has warned.

At Germany's insistence, a proposal to allow programmes targeted at the two groups to be set up by qualified majority vote was removed from the draft text of the Amsterdam Treaty.

The European Commission can still propose schemes under an existing legal provision, but this requires unanimous approval and Germany has, until now, always vetoed any such plans.

Officially, Bonn argues there is no need for EU-wide action to help the disabled and the elderly, claiming national or regional schemes are far more effective.

Unofficially, the German finance ministry has made it clear it simply does not have the spare cash to fund new projects. Any proposed programmes would have to be financed using the 'matching funds' principle, with national governments and the Commission each paying roughly half of the total cost.

In the closing weeks of the Intergovernmental Conference, officials in Flynn's Directorate-General for social affairs (DGV) lobbied hard for a specific treaty clause to allow such schemes to be adopted by majority vote and thus get around the Germans.

Speaking after last week's summit, the Commissioner voiced his dismay at his defeat.

“I deeply regret the negative political signal sent out by the inability of the member states to agree to incentive measures ... in areas such as disability, ageing and equal opportunities,” he said.

Groups representing the disabled also condemned the move. “It is an indictment of certain member states that minimum cost measures to promote innovation, exchange and good practice did not enjoy universal support,” said Johan Weseman of the European Disability Forum.

The new treaty does, however, allow for some action programmes to be adopted by majority vote; specifically, projects tackling what the Commission calls “social exclusion” as well as initiatives designed to generate jobs.

DGV officials admit that in the current political climate they were lucky to secure even this partial success.

Critics claim that Amsterdam seems to have taken a somewhat schizophrenic attitude to disabled people, giving with one hand only to take away with the other.

While member states seem to have ruled out taking any positive action to help the physically impaired, the treaty boasts a brand new 'anti-discrimination' clause which specifically mentions both the disabled and the elderly. In addition, a declaration attached to the treaty calls on EU institutions to consider the needs of disabled people when drawing up single market rules.