EU Employment and Social Policy Ministers Meeting Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Work and Pensions

EU Employment and Social Policy Ministers Meeting

Lord Grayling Excerpts
Monday 19th July 2010

(14 years, 4 months ago)

Written Statements
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Grayling Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling)
- Hansard - -

The informal meeting of Employment and Social Policy Ministers took place on 8 to 9 July 2010 in Brussels, Belgium. I represented the United Kingdom.

The priority for this informal meeting was the new Europe 2020 strategy, focusing on the main objectives, as well as the implementation of the new strategy. Ministers were given the opportunity to highlight the importance of the social dimension and employment in EU 2020, through four workshop sessions focusing on employment on the first day and social affairs on the second.

The presidency underlined the importance of both competitiveness and social cohesion in the European employment strategy within Europe 2020. Its ambition was for the Employment and Social Policy Council (EPSCO) to have greater influence. This would require changing working practices and methods but would provide Europe with a greater ability to co-ordinate and steer European economies. Most member states agreed on the need for a closer relationship between EPSCO and Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN). For the UK, I agreed on the need for a close relationship between EPSCO and ECOFIN but stated that this could be achieved through greater co-ordination, and need not require changes to formal mechanisms. I also underlined that job creation would not be possible without a thriving business sector.

There were discussions on how the EU could help member states deal with the consequences of ageing on the labour market. The Commission emphasised the need for policies which allowed older people to stay active on the labour market for longer. Member states agreed that demographic change was a real challenge and that action was needed in response. Several also highlighted that the increased demand for care services could provide job opportunities in many member states.

Member states were also invited to consider how European Union level policies could foster green jobs and prepare the labour market to tackle climate change. The Commission commented that there had been some debate on what green jobs actually were and that this term still held slightly different meanings in different member states. Those who intervened agreed that action on tackling climate change presented job opportunities, but that all relevant stakeholders, the Commission and sectoral Councils needed to work together in order to make any real progress.

On pensions and social inclusion in the context of an economic crisis, member states were asked to consider a common EU framework for adequate minimum incomes. This was met with opposition from many member states. For the UK, I agreed that while minimum income policies should be considered, this had to be at national and not European level.

The presidency invited ideas on how the Social Protection Committee (SPC) and the Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC), (the sharing of best practices), could help to design and implement guidance for the framework of pension schemes in the future. The Commission introduced their recently published Green Paper on pensions, which considered how best to ensure sustainable, adequate and safe pension schemes across the European Union. This was met with mixed views from some member states including the UK who all argued that the case for strengthened European level pension policy co-ordination was weak but that improved indicators, reporting and information sharing could be helpful.

There were discussions on how, within Europe 2020, the OMC could be reinforced and the role of EPSCO strengthened. Many member states stressed that Social Affairs Ministers would need to ensure that EPSCO continued to play a role in discussions. Some commented that an increased focus on budgetary issues risked forcing out the debate on social protection and social inclusion.