Companies, Malosse (EESC): “The European Commission did not live up to its responsibilities”

Interview with the President of the European Economic and Social Committee, who after his tour among member state companies says: “All of them are disappointed by Brussels; the dissatisfaction will inevitably show in the next elections”

He made a tour of European companies; he spoke with businessmen and met workers and now he is not afraid to say clearly: “In the course of the last few years the European Commission has not lived up to its responsibilities in defending the general interest of European businesses.” According to Henri Malosse, President of the European Economic and Social Committee, the European Executive’s action in the area of business just isn’t working like this. “What Tajani is doing fine,” he admits but “there are at least 2 things that must change on a European level.”

Which ones?
First of all we need to soften European policy in the field of competition. It is no longer suited to the modern world. It was great in the 70’s and 80’s but in the globalized world with China, which has a type of capitalist state system and with America, where Obama programs that pass for public aid and agreements between businesses are no longer effective. The Commission’s rigorous policy must be revised in a way that is more favorable for European industry, as much on a public support level as agreements between businesses: it is not about disrupting the market but allowing alliances to make them stronger.

In addition to the competition policy what needs to be reviewed?
In my opinion trade policy must be more pragmatic. I believe the one conducted by the European Commission is too ideological and not very practical. I am opposed to protectionism but also to free trade for the free exchange. I am touring Europe and all the businessmen I meet, or at least the majority of them, tell me: “We have problems accessing the market, for example in Brazil or the United States.” At home we have competition but elsewhere there isn’t any. We must introduce more reciprocity and have a more pragmatic foreign policy, closer to European interests and not the free trade ideology from last century. We must understand how to help the European industry, this includes developing genuine European research.

Today there aren’t any?
Now there are insufficient research programs, both in volume and in quality. In this sense this is a huge waste. For example, they could have said: “Let’s concentrate on 3 priorities,” but if we look at EU research programs (for example Horizon 2020), there is an endless catalogue to please everyone a little. But means are limited, the procedures are very long and the business owners know they will not have even 1 Euro before 3 years. Furthermore, the fear is that in the meantime their idea can be copied or reproduced. For example, an Italian entrepreneur was telling me: for the European program he would have needed to explain the entire process, it would have been reproduced by experts, perhaps related to other interests. The fear is that the idea will be copied. And then there is a problem of funds on European research programs: one concentrates on general research, while the one the business needs is applied research – research about the market. An idea we can turn into product tomorrow or in 3 months, not 30 years.

What mood did you find on your tour or European businesses?
They are all very disappointed by Europe. The small and medium enterprises see Europe more as a source of difficulty than help. There are too many regulations, too many formalities, too much bureaucracy. Tajani made this Small Business Act, which is very good, but they are recommendations, nothing concrete happens. Businesses are very deluded. Large businesses don’t expect anything more from Europe because they are already in world markets, the small and medium ones would need support and aid. But research programs are difficult to access; competition policy hinders aid to businesses. Because of this entrepreneurs see Europe as an obstacle. And then there is the problem of mobility of workers.

Meaning what?
There are very few workers who relocate in Europe. There are people who move, but for the most part they are students. I will give you an example. I met a French Director from the Paris area, who works in the field of new technology. He told me his main problem is finding qualified and competent people to hire for reasonable prices. Not being able to find French workers, he asked employment agencies to look on a European level. They told him they didn’t know how to, that it is not possible. He told me: “Europe doesn’t work.” In other words, there is dissatisfaction regarding many things, which will inevitably show in the next elections.

Whose responsibility is it?
The poor European Commission cannot take all the blame; I think there is also much responsibility at the level of the Council of Ministers. What I have ascertained is that citizens in general will no longer tolerate this scapegoat game. The governments say: “It is Brussel’s fault,” Brussels says: “It is the government’s fault.” And nothing changes. It’s an easy game. It is true the Council of Ministries has great difficulty deciding, but we must admit that in the last few years the European Commission has not lived up to its responsibility in defending the general interests of businesses, and I am not afraid of saying it.

Letizia Pascale