International

The right-wing parties in the European Parliament love to talk about competitiveness. What they mean to suggest by using this term is that the European Union can only be competitive if labour costs are no higher than those of competitors or potential competitors. What sensible people call ‘exploitation’ these parties often view as ‘reform’.  All means are used to achieve this: the working of the internal market, restraints on enforcement of social rights, which are seen as ‘administrative burdens’, and even trade and investment treaties. In my view, we should reject these practices at the ballot box, and the first opportunity to do this in the Netherlands will be our provincial elections of 18th March. As our Senate is indirectly elected by the Provincial Assemblies, and as the government’s grip on power depends on continued Senatorial support, a big anti-government vote will represent another nail in the coalition’s coffin.

Foto: Light Brigading

Employment Minister Lodewijk Asscher claims to be opposed to exploitation, which is why he has this week defended his proposal in Parliament to stop illegal practices of which workers have been the victim. The SP was critical of his bill. Although the proposed law does indeed include some positives, as the national daily NRC opined this week it is extremely doubtful that this will result in Romanians and Poles working in the Netherlands no longer being exploited. Tp ensure that, you must not only have laws but be able to enforce them, and Mark Rutte’s government has imposed swingeing cuts on the labour inspectorate.

In Brussels it’s arguably even worse. Straightforward proposals designed to improve enforcement are watered down out of respect for the fact that this is a national responsibility. Fine words, but I don’t notice much respect for the rights of member states in other matters, not for example when it comes to putting restraints on the free movement of workers or of services, should this disrupt the labour market, still less when it comes to respect for nationally-negotiated agreements on pay and conditions, such as our own Collective Labour Agreements (CAOs), when these are declared not to be nationally-binding. And in addition, not when a member state wants to defend the right to strike.

So a majority in the European Parliament is against making it binding to participate in the new European Platform, within which labour inspection services will cooperate to combat trans-border forms of exploitation. Most don’t even want the two sides of industry to be included as standard in the Platform. It seems that these politicians don’t really want to do anything to address exploitation at all.

This fits with a broader strategy. When Syriza wanted to increase the minimum wage in Greece, you could read in various newspapers that this was irresponsible. After all, Greece had been aided financially by other eurozone countries, such as the Baltic States, where the minimum wage was even lower. Is that, then, where we want the EU to be going, running down social rights until they reach the lowest common denominator?  Right-wing parties don’t see things in that way. They think it a fine thing if ‘competitiveness’ is enhanced on the backs of workers. The situation in the 19th Century in the Netherlands and elsewhere presents an ideal picture: every man for himself, every woman for herself, and no social safety net, which  merely keeps people from working. From this position you get also support for the new generation of trade and investment treaties which would create a massive single internal market embracing the EU, the US and Canada. ‘American conditions’ aren’t seen as all that bad by the right. What do they care if people with a full-time job can’t make ends meet? Surely they can simply take a second job on the side?

Tomorrow morning I will be meeting with experts on the issues involved and with trade union and employers’ representatives in the Huis van Europa (Europe house) in The Hague in order to discuss exploitation. In particular, we will be talking about my report on the Platform, but I am looking to a broader debate about whether we really want  to continue with a race to the bottom or hold on to what we have always seen as social justice? A European Union in which social rights were accorded more importance than is the market – that’s what the SP stands for.  On the 18th March the Dutch people will have the chance to settle things with the right, including with what they get up to in Brussels. Let’s hope they don’t let this opportunity slip away.