News

As civil society, we are co-responsible for how people see the European Union. I often see “yes, but” as an immediate reaction to any European proposal. The reality is that in the eyes of many, “yes, but” means a clear “no!” Such an attitude rarely helps to build bridges.

It’s easy to bash the EU. It’s also often unfair. There are many challenges we must urgently find solutions to. That is clear. Yet the EU has limited competence on the policy areas that are best able to deal with many of these matters. The labour market, education and social policy are shared competences on paper, but national governments have by far the biggest say in these matters.

Far from what I often hear, the EU is actually more progressive in these fields than many, if not all European Member States. The EU’s political decision to fund quality inclusive – rather than old-fashioned segregating – social services for children, people with disabilities and older people is a good example of this. Similarly, the European Council recommendation on tackling long-term unemployment calls for all related elements to be taken into consideration. That’s rarely the case at national level. The EU’s response to the refugee crisis is to ask national governments to do more, not less for refugees. A strong European Pillar of Social Rights will also provide a good framework for positive change; far more ambitious than the positions of many national governments in this field.

Given that the EU institutions spend less than 0.3% of all public spending in Europe on social cohesion, the positive impact of European Structural and Investment Funds on our local communities is actually rather impressive.

I am the first to say that there is much room for improvement. The slow, bureaucratic, incremental nature of European policy-making is frustrating. Yet it is also a sign that the EU takes each different perspective seriously, including our own. Would the opposite provide as much room for civil society as the current structures do? I do not believe so. Similarly, the EU’s response to the economic crisis has been far from successful in limiting the negative impact on Europe’s most disadvantaged. Would the situation have been dealt with better without European coordination? Absolutely not. The neo-liberal agenda may be decided in Brussels, but not by Brussels.

We must avoid fuelling the fire of Europhobia and populism in Europe – on both sides of the spectrum. We must push for more cooperation on social issues – not blame the EU for the limitations generally imposed by Member States. We must make national authorities accountable again for decisions taken at European level. Let’s speak up for Europe – not bring it to its knees.

I believe that Social Platform has a very important role in this process: to build a common progressive message on Europe and project it at European level, and also in our communities by empowering our membership base. Together, I know that we will achieve our common aim of a more inclusive Europe!

By Luk Zelderloo, Secretary-General of Social Platform member EASPD (the European Association of Service Providers for Persons with Disabilities)
@EASPD_Brussels