Redefining the Purpose of Europe, British Embassy Paris

Speech by Graham Watson on Wed 6th Dec 2006

Graham Watson MEP

Leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe

The French Statesman Jean Monnet once observed: "Each man begins the world afresh. Only institutions grow wiser".

That's a claim I'd like to ponder.

No-one can deny we've come a long way fast.

Within my lifetime we built the single market, bringing prosperity undreamt of by my parents.

We've established a world reserve currency to rival the dollar.

And we've laid the basis for peaceful co-operation in so many areas. In a Union now embracing 460 million people.

Centuries of tribalism and hatred had been Europe's ugly legacy.

Now, war on a continental scale in Europe is unthinkable.

The architects of European integration knew that the key to peace and progress lay in interdependence. They built institutions on a foundation of coal and steel.

Their successors took on the torches and deepened co-operation.

So why is it that the EU will arrive at its 50th birthday in a state of mid-life crisis? Preparing for a party in Berlin where the most appropriate music may be the popular chorus "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to"? Partly because it is a victim of its own success: peace and stability are taken for granted.

But also because new threats and challenges are now upon us.

New responses are needed.

New countries are queuing up to join.

Our institutions, the building blocks of the Union, must be developed and adapted.

That is patently not happening at present.

As President Barroso said ruefully yesterday "you cannot build tomorrow's Europe with yesterday's tools".

Monnet, Schuman, Adenauer and others rose to the challenges of their time. Europe's present Leaders must rise to the challenges of ours.

Leadership is needed. By statesmen and women who define a vision of society and prepare the path towards it.

Not by politicians who pore over opinion polls and preach popular prejudice back to their citizens.

Where there is no vision there is no commitment. No looking forward. No sharing of responsibility. It is reminiscent of WB Yeats' words in the Second Coming: "The best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity".

I will argue today that Europe is failing in its historic responsibility.

Because our institutions are failing.

Member States failing to put long term strengths and common concerns above short term interests and individual gain.

A Commission lacking the courage to act.

And a European Parliament which has not yet risen to the challenge.

There is a risk of fear and fanaticism spreading in Europe. Threatening our social cohesion and the institutions of our economic and political success.

That is why we came off the rails at referendum junction.

But perhaps as Mark Twain said of Wagner's music, "It's not as bad as it sounds".

Help may be at hand. But that's for later in this speech.

Eighteen months ago the European Council declared a year's pause for reflection on a Constitution which was a reasonable attempt to make Europe more effective, more responsive and more relevant.

It's principal failings were its length, its title and its marketing.

But the principal cause of its downfall was the lack of courage and conviction of national leaders.

Eighteen months on, there are new faces in Council. A few brave voices have been raised. Including that of Nicolas Sarkozy, a Council hopeful and the first French presidential candidate ever to come to Brussels to launch his ideas.

Romano Prodi has called on his younger colleagues in Council to do something courageous together.

Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen has led by example, securing ratification of the Constitutional Treaty during his Presidency.

The Commission has given us a "Plan D" for dialogue, even if yet no

"Plan V for vision" or "Plan L for Leadership".

Only in London, Warsaw and The Hague has there been an eerie silence.

Some things are being done to show how the European Union adds value to our daily lives. Like action to cap mobile phone roaming charges.

But for this birthday party to be a success, it must be a forward looking event and not an excuse -however justified- for self-congratulation.

The Berlin declaration -however it is drafted- must set out the reasons why the Union exists and what it is for. For my part, I welcome this opportunity to contribute with a Paris Declaration.

It reads like this: "The Union is about supranational solutions to common challenges. It is about recognising in our diversity a strength and not a weakness. It is about creating new paradigms, beyond the local and national, which create real links and solidarity between people, not just states.

It is also about values. Values of fundamental rights and freedoms, the rule of law and good governance. About a concept of society shaped by solidarity. And these basic principles must guide us in the significant challenges we are facing, which require shared analysis and joint action."

When the time is ripe to re-consult citizens there should be a Europe-wide, simultaneous debate and vote. On whatever declaration comes out of Berlin.

Crisis is an overused word. However, John F. Kennedy once observed that, when written in Chinese, the word "crisis" is composed of two characters - one representing danger and the other opportunity.

That is how I see the EU at present. Becalmed between threatening storms and the winds of opportunity.

2. POPULATION GROWTH AND MIGRATION

So what challenges do we face and how should the Union respond?

First, rapid population growth beyond our borders but decline within.

Second, a climate changing faster than at any point in recorded history.

Third, an unprecedented threat from terrorism and organised crime, plaguing this new century just as war did the last.

Finally, a sluggish economy at risk from newly emerging economies like China and India..

Today's big challenges are supranational.

Take world population growth.

If you're poor, you need kids. To provide for your old age. And with five billion poor, population is rising dangerously. So we need to pull people out of poverty. Pronto.

How?

Education, especially for women.

Micro-credit for business.

Investment in good governance.

Development policy must do these.

But market access too. Because the hungry vote with their feet. So either we accept their produce or their migrants.

Of course, Europe needs migrants.

Our population is in free fall.

By 2050, on current trends, Italy will lose a quarter of its people.

By 2050 - unless our children are particularly prolific ! - people over 65 will account for nearly half the EU population.

Putting an intolerable strain on pensions and social services.

So Europe needs workers.

To pick our crops, drive our trucks and staff our care homes.

To help create the wealth which pays for social policy.

Developing countries need emigrants too, remitting valuable earnings back home.

"Migrations are necessary", as Kofi Annan said recently.

The time has come for national governments to put in place an immigration policy which serves our needs and those of others.

Not the current populist approach of 'Fortress Europe', where our border control agency Frontex sends boatloads of immigrants back to the shores they depart from.

To shut the gates of Fortress Europe is not just, in the words of the poet Thomas Gray, "to shut the gates of mercy on mankind". It is to shut the gates of opportunity on ourselves.

But migrants, and the children of migrants, must feel welcome in Europe.

Burning cars, looting and rioting do not emerge from nowhere.

For 300 years, Europe was a continent of net emigration.

In the last 30 years we've seen net immigration. Have our perceptions kept pace with this process?

Let's test it. Hands up everyone here who's from Africa!

All EU communities are of immigrant descent.

Many have successfully settled and integrated. By and large, the longer we've been here, the better.

But religion is the old bugbear. And where once we ghetto-ised the Jews, now it is the Muslims. An ever increasing number of young people is out of work and out of luck.

Tolerated until the war on terror and subjugated since, they are turning on society, looting the stores and burning the banlieue.

If these people had been treated with dignity from the start, would we be facing such phenomena today?

Why has it gone wrong for Europe? Because for all the fine words from the Tampere Council in 1999 to Tampere 2 last month, there's no policy run by institutions.

Every Member State is lost in the fog, feeling its way gradually from tolerance to inclusion.

Addressing the socio-economic problems is half the answer.

The other half has to do with citizenship, identity and the attitudes of their fellow Europeans.

Europe cannot be a white Christian club which reserves no place for others.

That approach is both intolerant and illiberal.

But it can expect immigrants to abide by universal values of respect, tolerance and the Rule of Law which are the fundament of our political system.

Only then can we enjoy the "Unity in Diversity" promised by the Constitutional Treaty.

These values, and not the traditions of individual Member States, are the values which define what it means to be European in a Union of 27 different countries. They apply as much to Europeans moving around as to those joining us from elsewhere.

And it is these values which will create a European civic identity to which those of immigrant descent can adhere- whether or not they identify with the culture and norms of their host nation.

The smartest political thinker of the 20th century was not the socialist Karl Marx with his theories of class. It was the Liberal, Woodrow Wilson, with his identification of identity.

A smart political thinker in this century would make multi-culturalism and European identity a centrepiece of EU activity.

3. CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE ENVIRONMENT - PRESENT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES

Another key challenge for Europe is to address climate change.

In the last fifty years the Earth experienced its fastest period of warming in two millennia.

Almost certainly linked to greater use of fossil fuels, particularly oil.

If we'd all heeded the warnings a quarter century ago we might have prevented it. If America acts in concert with us now, we might yet control it.

Carbon build-up in the atmosphere, severe weather patterns, increasing desertification. Problems affecting our capacity to grow crops to sustain life.

That's why tackling Climate Change has been at the heart of the EU agenda since Kyoto. Led by our institutions: Council, Commission and Parliament.

We've not only cut emissions from cars and other greenhouse gases.

European Emissions Trading came into force last year.

And from 2008, aviation will be included. To offset a forecast 83% rise in aircraft emissions by 2020.

Our Renewables Obligation has forced governments to invest in sustainable energy sources.

The EU's collective response to environmental challenges has been a success, though we must go further. And we must not let hesitation in national capitals deflect us from own goals.

Some see "greening Europe" as more burdens for business.

But it can bring economic reward.

In green technologies, opportunities for the future abound.

Already, investment in cleaner energy has brought new jobs and new technology and driven down energy prices.

Think of 'Smart' energy meters, soon to be in every home, allowing consumers to save money and monitor the impact of their energy use.

Can we do more of the same? Look at the REACH proposals!

Registering, Evaluating and Authorising up to 30,000 chemicals.

Essential to protect human, animal and plant life..

But they will also boost the market for greener goods. A market which exists already. And will continue to grow - giving Europe's industry competitive edge.

Are we on the threshold of a Third Industrial Revolution, as predicted by Jeremy Rifkin? Able to resurrect the European Economy on the back of sustainable new technologies?

Perhaps, if our institutions prevail. But we'll not achieve it on a budget of 1% of GNI.

Increasing the budget for the 7th Framework Research Programme, as the European Parliament has done, offers huge opportunities .

Within ten years, if the Member States will the means, we could have a hydrogen economy.

That makes not only environmental sense.

It makes political and business sense too.

Thirty five years after the first OPEC oil price hike the Russians turned off the gas tap to Ukraine.

Reliance on fossil fuels could hold Europe's governments to ransom and knock our economy for six. It is imperative to reduce our dependence on oil.

Hybrid cars are already on the market.

And if the home of the motor car, California, plans to cut emissions by 30% in ten years, why can't we?

Nor do the possibilities stop there.

Think of things we can do with pooled R & D money.

Things no country could do alone.

Fund research into bio-mimicry.

That's inventing processes which mimic life.

The Americans have found a butterfly in the desert.

Which strains water from the air through its wings.

They have copied its technique for the walls of tents.

Providing water for refugees.

We use enormous energy to heat kilns to fire porcelain.

But the abalone grows a shell both stronger and finer.

And it's made from?

Pure sea water.

Could we do that? Some scientists think we could.

That's why Parliament has acted to stop the Council cutting the EU's research budget.

The Commission is setting up a European Research Council. To encourage our scientists to come up with the unexpected.

Geared towards groundbreaking discoveries, taking a creative approach, exploring new directions.

It is in these new discoveries that sustainability and prosperity -our environmental and economic futures- will merge.

4. OPEN BORDERS AND SECURITY IN THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

But to build a successful Europe we must also confront political challenges.

Our borders now stretch as far as the Ukraine.

They may go further yet.

Bulgaria and Romania will take us to the Black Sea. Turkey would take us to the Middle East. Poland wants Ukraine in the EU.

Robert Schuman said that a country's European vocation is determined by the European spirit of its people.

Perhaps the limits of enlargement lie not between the Atlantic and the Urals but wherever people share, and live by, European values.

That is a debate for the future and a tricky one here in France. Yesterday it disappeared not in Bermuda but in the Weimar triangle. It cannot be tackled until a constitutional settlement is agreed. Until we have defined what we are for and what we are trying to do.

In the meantime, abolishing internal borders is not only a boon to tourists and legitimate business people.

It makes life easier for criminals too.

Criminal gangs are sometimes more powerful than some national governments.

Using countries like Colombia and Afghanistan to grow and process narcotic drugs for the rich world's markets.

Trafficking people for the sex trade.

Trading in arms and sometimes in nuclear materials.

Counterfeiting not just luxury goods, but medicines and even spare parts for aircraft!.

And increasingly linked to terrorism, since they need terrorists to keep countries like Colombia and Afghanistan ungovernable.

Experts say that up to 8% of the money passing through our financial systems is the proceeds of crime. Running into trillions of dollars.

Combating crime needs more multilateral cooperation than has ever existed before. And it needs a higher echelon of intelligence sharing, which Britain and France continue stubbornly to resist.

'European nations wait, each sequestered in its hate' So wrote the poet Louis MacNeice before World War II. These days his lines might read: "Member States take up position, each sequestered in suspicion". I suppose it's progress, of a kind. As the former French President François Mitterand observed "Every time you try to move a country, history grabs you by the ankles".

The tragedy of 9-11 gave some much needed impetus. For example the European Arrest Warrant, which I had the honour of pilotting through the European Parliament. But the institutional tools to make progress in tackling organised crime and terrorism still rest in the unopened toolbox of the EU Constitution.

The failure of the Council to activate the bridging clause in Article 42 means little progress will be made in an area where Europe's citizens demand action.

.

But nor should progress be made behind the backs of our citizens. In military security there is more going on than ever before. A European Defence Procurement Agency, up and running, even if only in embryo. Seven EU badged military missions already deployed, from Indonesia to the Congo. Fourteen EU battle groups within five years, each comprising fifteen hundred men or women in uniform. A European army? Those words will not pass the lips of any Defence Minister around the Council table, let alone a Prime Minister. Yet arguably it is. All this without public visibility or proper parliamentary oversight and control.

5. BOOM OR BUST? THE FUTURE DIRECTION OF EUROPE'S ECONOMY

The final challenge confronting Europeans is the state of our economy.

To compete we must reform expensive social models. And build a dynamic marketplace for goods, services, capital and labour.

The Lisbon Agenda offers the chance for Europe's economy to pull itself up by its bootstraps through a virtuous circle of action at EU and national levels.

Half the answer to the economy lies in education. Only a few weeks ago a report by Jacques Delors concluded that education both at school level and throughout our professional life must be improved. Currently, in France, some 100 000 young people leave school with few or no diplomas and are virtually predestined for low skilled and therefore low income jobs. The UK's Leitch report on further education has similarly depressing findings. This is clearly unacceptable and does not provide the jobs and skills the Union requires - quite apart from the human frustration it will also produce.

But we also need the courage for economic reform. As Jean-Claude Juncker said at the end of the Luxembourg presidency, "We all know what we have to do. We just don't know how to win elections afterwards".

Europe's growth rates are less than half those of America or Japan. We are losing ground every year. And losing our best brains to their companies.

Can we double our rate of growth?

Yes, and Frits Bolkestein told us how.

The trouble is how he did it. In typical Bolkestein style. If you're going to explode a firework the instructions say "Light the blue touch paper and retire". And that's exactly what Frits did.

If we could create a single market in services to rival our single market in goods, we could double growth rates easily.

The Services Directive shortly to gain approval at second reading achieves only half of what Bolkestein knew was possible. But half a loaf is better than no bread, which is why I led my troops into supporting it..

If we're serious about reform, we need to be prepared too to lose jobs in one sector just as they are created in another.

Take footwear, for example.

Southern European shoemakers had the Commission open an investigation. Into alleged dumping from China and Vietnam.

Why?

They're being priced out of the market.

By whom?

By the northern European shoemakers who've re-located production.

All EU countries knew quotas would be lifted. Some manufacturers planned ahead. They brought cheaper shoes to shoppers. Others are now crying foul. The Commission was fool enough to heed them.

But let me end here with a warning. Liberals must recognise, as Ben Bernanke told the US Federal reserve a few weeks ago, that the impact of rapid global economic integration is causing serious disruption and widespread fear. In the developed and the developing worlds.

In the global economy at the start of the 21st century we need a global social contract. Just as, at the start of the 20th, Liberal social reforms permitted progress. When just two percent of adults own more than fifty percent of global assets, the danger signs should be clear.

Development policy is a large part of the answer. But so is upskilling at home for those of working age and proper provision for those beyond.

CONCLUSION

Six hundred years ago the Chinese explored and mapped our world. Followed by Arabs, Ottomans, Europeans.

We have now fully entered the age of globalisation.

A new age demanding new approaches to offering citizens the security, prosperity and opportunity they expect.

We cannot turn back the clock to the era of Nation States -

• flexing their muscles around the globe with scant regard for their neighbours.

In many respects that approach - and the mistakes - are repeated by the United States today.

Arrogant unilateralism backed up by military force that risks winning more enemies than friends.

Are States condemned to repeat history?

Have we Europeans finally learnt our lessons?

There are signs that we see the significance of soft power. We need yet to harness it. And the imperative of unity.

Hitherto, the drive for European Union has come from within, and from statesmen prepared to be pioneers.

Now it comes from beyond our borders, and from citizens living below the digital divide.

Today's challenges cannot be addressed by Member States alone, or by politicians who fail to understand the electronic age.

President Barroso cannot co-ordinate disparate Member States.

Especially if dogged by indecision and undue deference to Council.

Nor is the prognosis for the German presidency very optimistic. The Germans themselves are working hard to play down expectations, hamstrung by the electoral timetable in France.

It is to the European Parliament that Europeans must look.

A Parliament increasingly willing to be out-spoken.

Aware of the demand from citizens for European action on the big issues.

Holding the Executive to account like never before.

A Parliament resurgent, with its own views on major and complex pieces of legislation ..

.. and not afraid to throw them out if they are unworkable. Like software patents or regulating exposure to sunlight.

We have our own proposals for the future of the Constitution. Elaborated this week with representatives of 27 national parliaments with whom we co-operate ever more closely.

We will have an input to the Berlin Declaration.

In short, the European Parliament is coming of age.

Ideology has surpassed nationality as the main determinant of voting behaviour.

Politicians now look to Strasbourg for a career, not as a step on the ladder towards national office or a comfortable rest home thereafter.

Debates with Council are no longer about schedules and procedure but about strategy and politics .

And Parliament's Party leaders orchestrate their political families, co-ordinating networks from the centre of attention.

That's why I convene six prime ministers before each summit.

And why Poettering of the EPP, who proposed Barroso as President of the Commission, is shortly to become President of the European Parliament.

It's why Martin Schulz, better known than before his debate with Mr Berlusconi, is able to attract top American politicians to his meeting this week in Oporto.

Parliament does not yet possess a right of initiative or to propose the President of the Commission. The passerelle clause has not yet been activated to give us wider power.

But none of these is now unthinkable.

The Union is not leaderless.

But critics must learn to look for leadership in an unfamiliar place.

I contend the European Union is still going strong. And that we can look forward with Victor Hugo "to the day when the only battlefields will be those of markets open for business and the human spirit open for ideas".