European
Union rules meddle in the wrong places
September 9, 2008 17:07 | by
Erik Meijer, MEP
'Brussels' is a rewarding target for ridicule. The EU rules on
how bent a banana must be or how straight a cucumber form an image
in the public's mind of superfluous interference, of a meddlesome
Brussels. Europe too often interferes in the wrong areas and acts
regularly as a source of obstructiveness, frustrating national plans,
says Erik Meijer, MEP.
An example of this interference came this month with the European
Commission's 'no' to small, low-cost improvements which would make
intercity trains in the Netherlands faster. The Netherlands must instead
buy a safety system which is almost ten times as expensive, still
doesn't work perfectly and will not come to fruition until 2020.
Commission President José Barroso understands that you can
better answer criticism with deeds than with words, moving to kill
the 'cucumber criticism' with an attempt to have the offending rules
scrapped. But the southern member states cherish these rules, or so
he complained this summer.
This problem does not of course really emanate from Brussels. Members
of the Dutch and other member state governments were present when
each and every one of these rules was confirmed. In the European Parliament,
also, the Dutch political parties currently in government, the centre-right
Christian Democrats (CDA) and centre-left Labour Party (PvdA) have
formed since time immemorial, together with their sister parties from
other member states, an absolute majority. They are thus being grossly
hypocritical when they complain about EU rules.
What these parties, governing both the Netherlands and Europe, continually
do is use regulations to force through liberalisation. This not only
sounds like a contradiction in terms, but is one. The freedom of a
community to give work to its own socially-owned or socially-supported
workplaces is deemed by Brussels 'illegal state aid'. A recent EU
enquiry into alleged distortion of competition by a Dutch zoo on the
basis of a complaint brought by a zoo in London was an example of
this which was plainly laughable..
Our reusable bottle for lemonade has had to be replaced under pressure
from Brussels because the environmentally-friendly system favoured
by the Netherlands was 'distorting' the European market. These are
each examples of a persistent mania for rules. Europhiles point readily
to the way in which the practices of telecom corporations have been
dealt with, or to the removal of border controls. Applause. But the
removal of border-hopping rail and bus services is not to be found
on their list. Yet if you compare the timetables of regional public
transport with those of thirty years ago, you will find that it is
rather more difficult than it was to get to Belgium or Germany from
the Netherlands.
The Brussels mania for rules is so extensive that independent specialists
are often hired to help deal with it. Even national governments make
use of lobbyists and offices dedicated to getting money back from
Brussels to finance Dutch plans. Obviously, a slice of this returned
budget disappears into the pockets of the middle-men, to say nothing
of all the accountants needed to control this shifting around of money
or of the fraud that these European subsidy regulations encourage.
The EU interferes too often in the wrong things and concerns itself
too seldom or too slowly with matters where there is evidently a need
to do so. Such as in the protection of the public from unequal treatment,
in the preservation of housing corporations and essential services,
the suppression of dangerous products and unhealthy food, with alternatives
to nuclear power and GMOs, or with real openness in government. Non-commercial,
collective institutions concerned with housing, health and health
care, transport, waste disposal, energy and education should not be
forced to chase profits. Pushing through liberalisation by means of
regulations is just as daft as talking about whether cucumbers are
straight enough.
Erik Meijer is a Member of the European Parliament for the Socialist
Party of the Netherlands, and the
United Left Group/Nordic Green Left. This article first appeared
at the beginning of September in a number of regional dailies in the
Netherlands, including Het Dagblad van het Noorden. It was translated
by Steve McGiffen.
See also
http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/wurtz11.htm
|
|
SPECTREZINE
Homepage
Weblog
Spectremail
Contact
LATEST
FEATURES
the
practical internationalism of the Dutch Socialist Party - by Ronald van
Raak
The
Left in Italy - by Paolo Gerbaudo
Europe
and the Lisbon Treaty - by Susan George
The
Last War of the 20th Century - Part Thirteen - by Jan Marijnissen and
Karel Glastra van Loon
LATEST
NEWS FROM
THE WEBLOG
Weblog-
Homepage
The Saintes Appeal
for a Nuclear-free Europe
Italian Left Euro-MPs:
Exploitation of fear for political purposes unacceptable
Turbulent times for Eurozone
CATEGORIES
Africa
Book
Reviews
Corporate
Crime
Current
Issues
Economy
and Society
East
Asia
Editorial
Environment
Europe
Global
Resistance
Latin
America/Caribbean
Middle
East
North
America
Progressive
Press
War
ARCHIVES
News
Review 2001-04
Features
2001
Features
2002
Features
2003-04
|