A challenge for Europe

Of course! Economic growth in Europe must be more ecologic and environment-friendly, thus ensuring a more provident use of raw materials. Moreover, the need for stepping up inclusive development thereby improving the living conditions of the poor, and the fact that quality must take into account not only monetary parameters but also social and environmental criteria, should not be questioned. Finally, it must be ensured that the impact of economic growth is not only experienced in privileged regions, and ensure its balanced distribution across the whole of Europe.If this is the situation, it is also a fact that Europe must necessarily recover the right path, leading to flourishing growth. It is crucial for our societies. If not, how can we imagine honouring consistent public debt that has been mounting over the past thirty years? In fact, the glorious thirty years that ensued the post-war period, the sumptuous three decades of the reconstruction, were followed by three inglorious decades, during which the succeeding governments, elected with our support, funded our lifestyles through debt. Too often the credits contracted simultaneously thanks to small savers and major financial institutions, were insufficient to finance long-term economically feasible projects, needed for the common good. Rather, they served to compensate accumulative cash deficits.We need economic growth. How could we otherwise pay early-retirement and retirement pensions, or provide medical assistance and social services, that increase alongside with European population ageing and the empty cradles? For the above reasons we should applaud the proposal of the European Commission for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020. By introducing the “innovative budget”, due to represent a major challenge of his mandate, the president of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso, explained the philosophy of said proposal: «All across Europe, governments, enterprises and families are prioritising where to spend their money. It is now time to seriously consider the cuts that need to be made. We need to be realistic in the current circumstances: Europe needs investments. Europe needs rigour, at the same time Europe needs growth. And growth to be achieved needs investments».As relates to “revenue” the proposal of the European Commission surprised many observers when it endorsed the financing of a considerable portion of future budgets by means of a new system for its own resources, starting with the taxing of financial transactions and of a portion of VAT, thus providing resources for the European budget. In order to step up the democratic feature of this new budget funding approach, the Commission upholds the European Parliament proposal calling for an inter-parliament conference in conjunction with national parliaments. It equally proposes to simplify the rebate system granted to several countries, notably the UK. These two features – own resources and rebate – risk being met with the forceful opposition of several Member States. Knowing that the multiyear framework program should obtain the unanimous consensus of the European Council it should be expected that the initial proposal of the executive body will undergo considerable amendments as relates to revenue. Similarly, expenditure guidelines risk triggering a discussion between our national government leaders and the European Parliament. However, for the above-mentioned reasons, for the recovery of growth it is to be hoped that the emphasis placed on research and innovation in the document of the Commission (80 billion euro for the period 2014-2020) is not lost in negotiations, and the same goes for 15.2 billion Euro allocated for education and training. These sums are still low compared to expenditure for agricultural policy – experiencing remarkable “green up”- and for cohesion policy (approximately 370 billion per item), but their symbolical meaning exceeds their monetary value. The same could be said about the changes proposed for the charter of European delegates, whose working hours and retirement age should be increased. In order to obtain consensus on an innovative budget for growth it is necessary to set the example.