Building on empty prophecies

Date: 11/09/1997

Geoff Meade takes a light-hearted look at life in the European Union IN A shock move, the man who will host November's European employment summit in Luxembourg has already declared the event a failure.

A full six weeks before the thing is supposed to be staged, Luxembourg Premier Jean-Claude Juncker has delivered his judgement and officials are now wondering whether it is necessary for EU government leaders to attend the event at all.

The dramatic announcement passed by almost unnoticed. Mr Juncker was addressing the European Parliament's economic affairs committee last week, and some honourable members were reportedly almost dozing off as he said that the purpose of the 21 November summit was to decide on concrete action to alleviate the problem of unemployment.

So far, so routine: we have had enough concrete promises in Euro-land over the years to build an entire Trans-European Network from Helsinki to Hydra.

But now Mr Juncker is offering us a new bench-mark for political success in Europe. “If this summit, like earlier summits, only results in declarations but few concrete measures, then it is a failure,” he told MEPs.

It was a damning phrase for, with those few words, the entire summit has been wiped off the map of historical importance: for what else does Mr Juncker really expect but declarations?

Summits are declamatory, after all - an occasion for grandstanding by our leaders. That is not to say that their declarations are not sincerely meant and that they will not, in time, be turned into something approaching concrete or, at the very least, putty.

But the idea that by the time the special summit ends and EU leaders are heading home some of the unemployed will have been offered jobs as a direct result of their discussions is a bit fanciful.

No, Mr Juncker knows a dead loss when he sees one and he is doing the pundits' job for them, before the event.

So what are these concrete measures without which the summit will fail? Mr Juncker told the economic affairs committee that he wanted the summit to lead to the adoption of clear guidelines for European employment policy which would form an integral part of the European Union's overall economic guidelines. These guidelines, he insisted, should be as concrete as possible.

So there you have it: the aim of the summit is to agree on clear, concrete guidelines resulting in concrete measures to reduce Europe's dole queues. Without them, we have been given clearance to dismiss the event as a failure.

Mr Juncker's remarks have surprised observers in Brussels, who see them as a hostage to fortune. “Certainly it is more usual for summits to be dismissed as a waste of time only after they have taken place,” said one seasoned onlooker.

Another commented: “This is a new departure in European Union public relations. The Luxembourg presidency is clearly intent on establishing new criteria for the media's response to set-piece occasions like summits. By passing judgement on the outcome of the summit before it begins, Mr Juncker is saving everyone a lot of time and money.”

Speculation is now intense that the new format will apply to other events, helping journalists and the public to reach conclusions about ministerial meetings, Commission gatherings and even European Parliament plenary sessions weeks before they take place.

It is just a pity nobody thought of it sooner - throughout the BSE crisis, for instance, when we could have done with some helpful guidance about the outcome of those endless and totally confusing gatherings of veterinary experts.

We needed someone like Mr Juncker to advise us in advance: “If this crucial meeting of the Standing Veterinary Committee, like earlier meetings, results in a couple of dozen men in crumpled suits emerging from the building and then dashing for taxis while refusing to say anything, with few concrete quotes, then it is a failure.”

Instead of which we had people pretending that the above-mentioned circumstances - or indeed any others - signalled some great triumph, a monumental breakthrough in tackling the disease.

What we really need is a permanent official in each EU institution whose job is to signal the outcome of significant Euro-events well in advance.

Here are some examples of what they might have said, or might say in future.

The Council of Ministers: “If the Amsterdam summit waters down the treaty text agreed by Intergovernmental Conference negotiators and decides to ditch key areas of integrationist development in the interests of achieving some semblance of progress and harmony, then it is a disappointing and embarrassing rejection of the ideals of the founding fathers.”

The European Parliament: “If next month's emergency debate on the situation in Montserrat produces endless squabbling about voting procedures and the rights of the independent member for the Austrian Alps to have three minutes of speaking time, then it is a democratic shambles which brings the only elected body in the EU into disrepute.”

The European Commission: “If the Commission weekly meeting results in a discussion which goes on into the late afternoon before it is announced that a decision has been postponed until the next week, then it is an unprecedented internal rift which severely damages the principle of collegiality.”

The Economic and Social Committee: “If an opinion delivered by the Economic and Social Committee makes it on to the front page of a national newspaper anywhere in Europe, then it is a major breakthrough and a surprising shift in priorities which will be welcomed throughout the institution often dismissed as the EU's poor relation.”

If Mr Juncker, Luxembourg's premier, finance minister, tea boy, doorman, cleaner and now far-seeing mystic, has accurately predicted the outcome of November's employment summit, then it is the start of a whole new era which will see news brought to us before it happens with implications no one can possibly predict.