Social rights

Every year in February, the EESC adopts an opinion on the Annual Sustainable Growth Survey (ASGS), which the Commission usually presents at the end of November in the year before. To reinforce the Committee's impact throughout the entire annual European Semester cycle, an own-initiative opinion with additional considerations is regularly produced by October taking into account the overall European Semester process and RRF developments, and providing a timely input to the Commission's preparation of the next ASGS expected again for November 2024. 

One of the main conclusions of the 8th Cohesion Report is that although cohesion and convergence among regions in the European Union has improved, there are still remaining gaps especially in less developed regions related with their territorial characteristics. EU islands, mountain areas and sparsely populated areas still face many challenges on their growth and income and disparities exist.

In these regions, there are still a lot of gaps in terms of employment and investment, social exclusion is evident and gender disparities have not diminished.

Every year in February, the EESC adopts an opinion on Annual Sustainable Growth Survey, which the Commission usually presents at the end of November in the year before. The Committee works under tight deadlines, in anticipation of the referral, to finalise the opinion before the March Council discussion on the topic. To reinforce the Committee's impact throughout the entire European Semester, an own-initiative opinion with additional considerations is regularly produced by October taking into account the overall European Semester, which plays a central role in implementing the Recovery and Resilience Facility and is vital in current discussions about the review of the EU macro-economic governance framework.

This opinion focuses on the reform and investment measures in the Member States, in particular those based on the Country-Specific Recommendations 2023, and their implementation, in order to assess the effectiveness of these measures and the possibilities for better targeting of proposals, improved implementation and the monitoring and involvement of organised civil society in the procedures. This opinion also looks at issues concerning the ongoing reform of the EU’s economic governance rules, the central objective of which is to strengthen public debt sustainability while promoting sustainable and inclusive growth in all Member States through reforms and investment. Moreover, the opinion continues the previous consultation exercises by examining the state of the implementation of the reforms and investments provided for in the national Recovery and Resilience Plans and which are financially supported by RRF funds.

The focus of current informal discussions in the Council is on how cohesion policy can adjust to the new circumstances following the unforeseen shocks that Europe has faced in the last years without losing its long-term development goals. The Spanish Presidency refers to "Cohesion policy 2.0" in this context, which particularly means that cohesion policy needs to be transformed and become more modern and flexible. Also, it will need to take into account the RRF which will come to an end at some time.

At the request of the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the EU, the EESC is drawing up this opinion to suggest recommendations on how to tackle inequalities, foster upwards social convergence and strengthen social security systems and ensure its long-term affordability, in an EU economic governance framework/European Semester defined around debt sustainability, productive investments and reforms. This opinion is also focusing on the implications of such a framework for the European Semester, and the further strengthening of the social pillar herein. Finally, the opinion also looks at ways of continuing to further develop fiscal instruments that have a stabilising role at the European level, based e.g. on the experience of SURE.

The movement of skilled workers out of regions already suffering from lower economic development may further undermine the growth and development potential of these regions. Such a "brain drain" from vulnerable EU regions therefore may contribute to widening territorial disparities, going against the objective of territorial cohesion set out in Article 174 TFEU. Given the cross-border impact of such developments the Commission considers that action at EU level is necessary.