"Mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy from the gender perspective"
Hearing of Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality
25 January 2005
Intervention of Simon Wilson, Director, Social Platform
I would like to thank the Chair and rapporteur for inviting the Social Platform to give evidence to this public hearing.
The Platform of European Social NGOs (the Social Platform) is the alliance of representative European federations and networks of non-governmental organisations active in the social sector. Our members include organisations campaigning for gender equality, including the European Women’s Lobby, and many other groups working on issues relating to gender equality, including social inclusion, ageing, discrimination.
Maintaining the social pillar within the strategy
This is a critical time for the future of European social
policy. We understand that the Commission is preparing to announce on 2 February
that the broad social vision established at Lisbon in 2000 must be abandoned.
Instead, the Commission will propose that industrial restructuring, the European
employment strategy, and the BEPG will be the revised focus of the Lisbon
strategy. The commitment to achieve ‘greater social cohesion’ within the
strategy would then be dropped – with social inclusion goals
marginalised.
At a time when the feminisation of poverty is a key issue across the EU, there is a strong risk that the EU will retreat from a vision which encompasses fighting exclusion and poverty towards a more limited approach based around economic policies.
This is a very worrying prospect for social NGOs – who believe that the EU must offer a social, as well as an economic vision, and that the Lisbon strategy represents a clear commitment to the European social model. To attempt to ‘reinvent’ Lisbon would be seen as a betrayal of this vision.
Let me turn now to issues specifically relating to gender equality.
The submission of a Commission report on gender equality to the Spring Council in 2004 was a significant step forwards, which should be maintained, to ensure the visibility of gender equality within the strategy.
However, this report should also focus upon gender mainstreaming in economic areas.
Gender mainstreaming
Gender mainstreaming continues to be non-systematic, and gender impact assessment of existing systems and new policies is lacking.
Gender equality should be mainstreamed into the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines – currently it is completely absent. Without an evaluation of how the economic policies promoted within the BEPGs affect women and men differently, it is very difficult to tackle the direct and indirect discrimination experienced by women.
We also recommend that recognition is given to women’s domestic care work within economic policy considerations, including within GDP calculations.
The proposed Gender Institute can also play a key role in raising the visibility of gender equality, and in developing gender mainstreaming tools.
Employment
The employment rate target for women of 60% employment by 2010 is challenging for Member States, and progress has not been sufficient. The target must be strongly maintained as a key element of the strategy.
However, the October 2003 National Action Plans (NAPs) on Employment do not establish gender equality as an overarching objective.
Efforts to increase the participation of women in the labour market will not be sufficient if Member States do not also address the underlying causes of gender gaps in employment, unemployment and pay.
There needs to be more access to life-long learning and specialised training for women to enable women to have access to the workforce and there needs to more of a concerted effort to reach the Lisbon Agenda’s childcare/eldercare targets.
The Social Platform calls for more effective implementation of gender equality legislation including in relation to the equal pay directive, maternity and parental leave, and equal treatment.
Social Exclusion
More work is needed to strengthen the practice of gender proofing of policies and actions for combating social exclusion.
Progress on recognising the role of gender in social exclusion is very weak, despite the Council Decision on the revised European Strategy to combat poverty and social exclusion clearly emphasising the importance of taking the role of gender into account. Gender equality does not appear in the priorities set by most National Action Plans; there is a lack of gender analysis and of gender impact assessment; there are very few targets segregated by sex; gender mainstreaming across the common objectives is limited to employment, and the participation of NGOs dealing with gender issues is very marginal.
Reform of social protection systems
Social protection reform is likely to come increasingly to the forefront of policy measures over the second half of the Lisbon strategy.
Modernisation should not undermine key principles such as solidarity and equality.
The role of social protection systems in relation to carers is of particularly important in relation to gender equality.
There is a need to recognise unpaid care work involving more than 4 hours a day as a form of employment, including in pension entitlements
The Social Platform also recommends the undertaking of an EU-wide study on the adequacy of pensions, paying specific attention to the gender dimension.
Social protection modernisation must also be linked to the employment targets, by prioritising and developing non-financial measures to assist people in taking up employment, including affordable, quality child care and care for elderly people and people with disabilities.
Access for goods and services
The exemption to Article 4 of the new gender Directive on equal treatment in access to goods and services should be reviewed in a few years because it allows for differences of treatment in the field of private pension funds on the ground of longevity acturial factors.
Conclusion
Whilst there are many specific areas where the gender equality dimension of the Lisbon strategy can be strengthened, real progress depends upon a renewed commitment to a balanced Lisbon agenda within the mid-term review. The Social Platform hopes that the Parliament can make a strong call to defend the social pillar of the Lisbon strategy.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
The 25 European Union leaders want to give new impetus to economic reforms - especially to make their countries more competitive.
What is the Lisbon Agenda?
When European leaders met at a summit in Lisbon in March 2000 they set the European Union the goal of becoming "the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world" by 2010.
It was the height of the dot.com boom, economic growth was good and prospects looked rosy. EU politicians were optimistic that Europe could enjoy the same kind of economic success as the US.
They set the target of achieving 3% average economic growth and the creation of 20 million jobs by 2010. The agenda set out the way to achieve this with a series of goals in areas such as employment, innovation, enterprise, liberalisation and the environment.
What were these goals?
The goals were wide-ranging and ambitious.
On employment, the goal was to raise the employment rate to 70% of the population by 2010 and to increase the numbers of women and older people in work.
To encourage innovation the goals included ensuring more homes had internet access and spending more on research and development.
On enterprise, countries were supposed to do more to support small businesses and reduce regulation and on liberalisation there was to be more competition in telecoms and liberalised gas and electricity markets.
For the environment, goals included reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Why does it need relaunching?
Five years on Europe is hardly the beacon of economic growth and prosperity that leaders imagined. Instead of things getting better, in many European countries the economic outlook got worse. In France and Germany, for example, unemployment is around 10%.
Of course, some of this was related to the downturn in the world economy following the bursting of the dot.com bubble.
But it is also clear that recovery has been much slower in Europe than in America. With the problem of ageing populations and growing competition from Asia, EU leaders recognise that something must be done.
It is accepted that member states have not made the necessary progress on the Lisbon Agenda goals. There have been some advances on specific goals, for example the liberalisation of energy, telecoms and financial services sectors. But the headline objectives of boosting jobs by 20 million and ensuring annual growth of 3% by 2010 a year will not be met.
What will the leaders agree to?
EU leaders are planning to give new impetus to the Lisbon process.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in February: "Lisbon has been blown off course by a combination of economic conditions, international uncertainty, slow progress in the member states and a gradual loss of political focus."
Leaders are likely to address these problems by reducing the number of goals and focusing on boosting jobs and growth. Instead of the current confusing myriad of progress indicators there will be one national action programme and implementation report for each country.
What is the Services Directive?
Under the Lisbon Agenda one of the areas earmarked for liberalisation is services.
The EU has a free market in goods, but not services. Yet services represent around 70% of the EU's GDP.
The European Commission presented its proposal to create an internal market in services early in 2004. The aim of the directive is to allow services to operate more easily across borders and will affect a vast range of businesses such as hotels and restaurants, car hire, construction and estate agencies.
It also covers advice provided by professionals such as architects and lawyers. It even mentions certain public services such as health care and environmental services.
Why is there a row about it?
The European Commission says the directive is essential to improve the EU's economy. It says 600,000 jobs could be created and output in the EU economy should rise by 33bn euros (£23bn; $43.5bn). Yet it is not being welcomed with open arms by some countries and trades unions.
The row centres on the "country of origin principle". This means that a company would have to operate according to the rules and regulations of its home country, rather than the country it was working in. So, for example, a builders' firm based in Spain could offer its services in the UK and France, but would operate under Spanish rules.
This is upsetting some countries and the trades unions because they say it could undermine standards.
A company from a country with laxer labour regulations could set up business in a country which would normally require higher standards and price its competitors out of the market, critics say. They also fear there could be a race to the bottom, with firms relocating to countries with less regulation and lower standards.
Which countries dislike the directive?
There is particular sensitivity in France and Germany, whose governments want the directive rewritten. Concerns are fuelled by high unemployment in these countries and public worries over social protection and workers' rights.
In France, anger over the services directive has become mixed up with the debate over whether to approve the EU constitution in a referendum on 29 May, even though there is no direct link between the two. For the first time some opinion polls suggest that a majority may vote against the constitution.
Leaders will not be taking any firm decisions on the directive at the March summit. The European Parliament will look at it later in the year, but the European Commission has already said it is prepared to make some changes.