Flexicurity

The Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs - agreed upon in 2000 - never got off the ground (only 4 years to go for being the strongest knowledge-based economic region in the world, Mr. Barroso!) and was therefor streamlined and redone a year ago.

The National Reform Programmes - strategy plans based upon boosting Research and Development (R&D) to 3% of the GDP and creating jobs - are the new backbones of the reform efforts and shall now be implemented. This is what the Spring Report of the Commission is about. ("Spring Report" ... thus the picture)

Research goes private

Until 2010, R&D investment shall go up to 3% of the GDP (from 1.9% in 2005). That's good and important. It's interesting how strongly the Spring Report emphasises the role of the private sector in this calculation. The Commission's strategy is not so much about direct investment into R&D (for example in existing public universities): "The biggest contribution, however, should come from the private sector". The keywords are public-private partnership, "improving market access conditions" (read: further liberalization), "modern and affordable property rights" (read: public investment in Research shall become private property) and new sources of financing (e.g. "risk sharing instruments", read: public bears the risk, private sector the profits).

Lisbon 1 was a failure exactly because everything from market liberalization to pension privatization was stuffed into the program that didn't find the focus on research and education.

The Lisbon Strategy is and shall not be common policy: the goal is the same (more jobs, more R&D), but the means shall be up to the member states. Countries that want to try it the "old-fashioned" style of broad public participation (via public universities, etc) shall be capable of doing so. Paleo-liberals shall try it their way (and hopefully fail). The better way will be found much quicker in this way.

EU goes higher education (and higher education goes private)

Don't get me wrong: I am very much in favor of a system where universities are incentives for economic success. I'm not so much in favor of a "public private partnership university" that pays for the research of private companies. Public universities shall get the profit of their research.

Although higher education is not a EU-field, the Commission is more and more interested in this topic. It calls for doubling of expenditure for higher education (=2% of GDP) by 2010. Good thing. But primary source for the money boost shall be (in the Commission's eyes) private sources of funding. And here's where the problem starts. As in the field of pension, public services and gas/energy/water the Commission frequently pushes for privatization. But neither the Commission nor the Council has any saying in that. They are far in excess of their competences.

Higher education shall be better financed. Fullstop. How the member states achieve it is their own business. There is simply no example that privatization of higher education would lead to better results.

"Flexicurity": EU goes neologism

Cuts in social security have a new name: Flexicurity. As this cute neologism shows, Security will be only half of what it once was. But seriously, "Flexicurity" leads to projects like the French CPE (go www.stopcpe.net). A flexible labor market and flexible employment structures are important, there are few persons who doubt that. But it's not social security that blocks more flexibility. It's the dirty goal of "Flexicurity" to shift the risk of investment into labor from the employer to the employee. This is far from acceptable. Small businesses shouldn't be overburdened by labor investment. But it's taxes and dues that make labor so "risky" for small businesses. Shifting the burden of taxation (for services that every business gladly consumates!) from labor to capital would be a far more effective way of creating flexibility. Again: flexibility is important. But not at the expense of social security.

Probably more on the Spring Report tomorrow. (Let's see)