By Bruno Waterfield - 16th October 2005
European commissioners are “fighting” on the EU executive over the Brussels balance between social protection and business friendly legislation.
‘Better regulation’ moves by the European Commission to cut red tape and boost EU economic growth have sparked concerns over social and environmental protection.
Revision of EU employment rights proposals and delays to environmental strategy papers have raised concerns among trade unions, NGOs and MEPs that commission balance gas swung too far to business.
Inside the EU executive disagreements have erupted over sensitive public health legislation on chemicals and ‘thematic strategies’ on the environment.
In an interview with EUpolitix.com, European Commission President Margot Wallström said she was “fighting” for a balanced approach with colleagues.
“I think it is always a challenge to make sure that we are seen to cover the whole of Europe and all interests,” she told this website.
“We have to be the ones who balance all the interests, to be seen to be defending society’s interest and not, for example, just the business interest.”
“I think it is very important to make sure we can maintain that balance. I will fight very hard for that in the commission as well.”
Wallström’s anger has spilled into the public domain over commission moves to water down REACH chemicals legislation.
As European environment commissioner under Romano Prodi and campaigner on environmental chemicals, Wallström was the original architect of REACH proposals.
“The REACH proposals were the result of a long complex process, involving the most conspicuous investment in studies and consultation that has ever been done by the commission.”
“I don’t have to remind you that public opinion sensitivity on this issue is very high,” she wrote in an internal memo leaked last week.
“While I can accept we show a willingness to help the other institutions to agree on a viable compromise, I cannot see any good reason why the commission should be lowering its stance and ambitions by positioning itself below the compromise [already] on offer.”
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.