European Economic
and Social Committee
Cost of non-Europe
Key points:
- The EESC welcomes the fact that, a quarter of a century after the publication of the Cecchini report in 1988, the Commission and the European Parliament have reopened the debate on the cost of non-Europe. However, the way these two institutions have elected to address the matter, i.e. by calculating once again the potential economic impact of removing barriers to trade, is inadequate, partly because of the danger of getting caught up in a purely technical debate on the costs of non-Europe, and partly because circumstances have changed completely since the Cecchini report was written. Today the state of the single market is no longer the core of the non-Europe debate.
- The opinion is therefore based on the realisation that the handicap beleaguering Europe now is not so much delays in building its internal market as the need to establish a strong economic, industrial and technological identity in the context of globalisation. The EESC believes that discussion therefore needs to consider all the costs of non-Europe resulting from the failure to complete European integration.
- The approach advocated in the opinion seeks to reduce costs, optimise expenditure, maximise opportunities and provide an appropriate response for meeting current challenges and finding a positive way out of the crisis which will benefit everyone.
- The EESC therefore calls on the Commission first to make as exact an estimate as possible of the full set of costs of non-Europe in the areas outlined in this opinion – namely the absence of real economic union and pooled costs in the areas of defence, diplomacy, customs, border guards, civil protection, combating fraud, etc. – and of their impact on employment and growth.
- The opinion also covers taxation, an area dominated by fiscal competition between the Member States with no common framework for social European interests, where it is necessary to envisage a structured framework for the convergence of national social, energy and even R&D policies.
- As a second step, the EESC proposes that the EU 2020 strategy include calculated objectives for reducing these costs accompanied by a clear action plan and a systematic evaluation of its progress.
Access the english version here (other language versions will be available soon)
Recommended for you
The cost of non-Europe - the benefits of the single market
Opinion
EESC opinion on the 2022 Strategic Foresight Report - COM(2022) 289 final Key points The EESC: believes that the single market is about improving welfare through social and…
Fragmentation of supply chains and impact on the cost of living
Opinion
The language versions will be available for download as the translations are completed.Key PointsThe EESC:emphasises the necessity for the EU to reduce import dependencies, especially for critical…
The cost of non-Schengen for the Single market – impact on Bulgaria and Romania
Opinion
Key pointsThe EESC:calls the Council to set a date for lifting land border controls between Bulgaria and Romania and the other Schengen Member States as early as 2024. The EESC calls on all…
How single market dysfunctionalities contribute to the rising cost of living
Opinion
KeypointsThe EESC : finds it regrettable that the cost of living in Europe is being fuelled by persisting dysfunctionalities in the European Single Market, and believes that more decisive action…
The future of EU industry in the face of high energy prices and transition costs
Opinion
Key pointsThe EESC:calls for urgent action to establish a comprehensive EU industrial strategy that ensures competitive industries and quality jobs, aligning with Green Deal objectives through close…