Flynn throws down the gauntlet on jobs

Date: 16/09/1999

Pádraig Flynn bowed out as Social Affairs Commissioner last week by controversially calling for the EU to instruct governments on what they should be doing to create jobs. Simon Coss explains why the idea has sparked anger in national capitals.

IT was quite a parting shot.

Outgoing Social Affairs Commissioner Pádraig Flynn's call last week for formal 'recommendations' to be sent to all 15 EU governments criticising their job-creation records certainly put the cat among the pigeons.

Disgruntled officials in many national employment ministries could be heard bemoaning the Irish Commissioner's move and suggesting that he would not have been quite so gung-ho if he were not preparing to leave Brussels for pastures new.

"Many people felt it was too early for the European Commission to have made such a move. Calling for recommendations is really the 'nuclear weapon' option," said one Union official.

Governments first voiced concerns about the idea during an informal meeting of EU social affairs ministers in July, when Flynn made it clear that he was planning to call on the Council of Ministers to deliver verdicts on member states' job-creation plans as they already do on their budgets.

But entreaties to the outgoing Commissioner to soften his approach fell on deaf ears and the proposal was published as planned following a debate at the last meeting of the old Commission.

Aides to the social affairs supremo argued that the action their boss had taken was necessary to prompt EU governments into showing that they were really serious about tackling unemployment at a Union-wide level.

"The public at large is watching to see just how committed their governments are to creating jobs," said Flynn's spokeswoman, Barbara Nolan. "We are not drawing these recommendations from thin air," she added, insisting the call for action was based on reams of detailed research.

Nolan also hotly refuted any idea that Flynn's announcement last week was an attempt by the retiring Commissioner to 'go out with a bang'. "I think those sorts of comments are very unfair," she said.

Flynn was able to drop his bombshell last week thanks to new powers which were granted to the Commission under the Amsterdam Treaty and which entered into force following the special EU 'jobs summit' in Luxembourg at the end of 1997.

Every year since then, EU governments have been obliged to produce 'National Action Plans' (NAPs), designed to show how they are meeting a series of EU-wide job-creation targets agreed at Luxembourg. These include reducing youth and long-term unemployment, and increasing access to vocational training.

To ensure that governments took their commitments seriously, the Commission was tasked at Luxembourg with drawing up annual assessments of the NAPs. It was also given the right to ask the Council of Ministers to send recommendations - which are the weakest of the EU's legal instruments and are not binding on governments - to any member state whose NAPs were not considered up to scratch.

That is precisely what former schoolmaster Flynn did last week when he published detailed reports on all 15 national job plans. Some EU governments - notably Denmark, Sweden, the UK and Ireland -fared extremely well and were held up as model students by the Commissioner. But others - such as Belgium, Greece and Italy - emerged firmly at the 'bottom of the class'.

In a bid to avoid any possible gloating by the more successful countries, Flynn decided to call for recommendations to be sent to all 15 governments.

While no one has questioned his legal right to make such a move, many national officials have queried the wisdom of launching such an initiative now, arguing that it is simply too early to assess whether the NAPs are working or not.

"We cannot really draw any conclusions from the whole process after the NAPs have only been in place for a little over a year," insisted one French diplomat, whose country fell into the 'passable' category in Flynn's reports.

"We are talking about dealing with underlying problems of structural unemployment and it will be a lot easier to see whether things have been working or not in five years time," she added.

The view from the Italian camp was equally lukewarm. "Our government knows there are problems, but we are not going to solve the issue of unemployment in a year," said one social affairs ministry official in Rome.

The official pointed out that Italy has just emerged from a very tough austerity drive which had helped the country qualify for inclusion in the single currency (a policy designed, ironically enough, by former Italian prime minister and incoming Commission President Romano Prodi). He suggested it was somewhat unfair for the Commission to expect his country to create many new jobs during such a severe period of national belt-tightening.

Even countries which received a congratulatory slap on the back from Flynn have questioned his wisdom in calling for recommendations so soon.

"The Council of Ministers is not obliged to issue recommendations and we will have to see what the consensus is during the next meetings of social affairs ministers," said one British diplomat. "Luxembourg has been in place since 1997 and this is the first time the Commission has decided to issue recommendations, so it would be understandable if the Council decided it needed more time to consider the issue."

French officials also predict social affairs ministers could well decide to "soften up" Flynn's proposals. "The Commission is taking a risk," said one.

Unlike in other areas of Union law, there does not have to be unanimous agreement between EU governments for Flynn's proposal to be rejected. This is an issue which can be decided by qualified majority vote, so the idea could be torpodoed by an alliance of just three or four member states.

It will be up to Finland, as current holder of the Union presidency, to try to broker a compromise on the proposals in time for a meeting of EU social affairs ministers early next month. Finnish diplomats say they will do their best to get agreement, but concede that EU governments may give Flynn's plan the thumbs down. "In order to form a blocking minority, you do not need so many countries," said one.

Nolan argues that this would be a disaster and would call into question the sincerity of the pledges made by EU leaders in 1997. "We are nearly two years on from Luxembourg and if we do not start using the tools that gave this process teeth, then the whole thing will lose credibility," she said. "We have come a long way since Luxembourg, but now its time to do something."

But other social affairs experts argue that it would not be the end of the world, if no recommendations were issued this time round. "If the Council takes the view that this year is too early, then so be it," said one national official.

Others argue that anyone who really wants to compare national efforts to meet the 'Luxembourg criteria' will find all the information they need in Flynn's report and point out that recommendations would not, in any case, oblige member states to change their ways.

But Nolan is adamant. She says that member states must rise to the challenge that Flynn has set them and ensure that the Luxembourg job creation process remains as a "legacy" of the outgoing Commission.

The sad fact is, however, that it is likely the only jobs Jacques Santer's shamed team will be remembered for creating are the 20 posts they freed by resigning.

Major feature. Padraig Flynn bowed out as Social Affairs Commissioner by controversially calling for the EU to instruct governments on what they should be doing to create jobs.