the role of the free movement of workers in the regional policy of the european union

8/13/2019 The Role of the Free Movement of Workers in the Regional Policy of the European Union

1/27

The role of the free movement of

workers in the regional policy of the

European Union in the light of the

French, German and British attitude

Agnes BALLA

Expert in international relations

Demokrator Foundation, Budapest

04/02/2014


2/27

2

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. 3

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4

EU enlargement and the attitudes of the three big European countries, France, Germany

and the United Kingdom .................................................................................................................... 4

The attitude of the United Kingdom, Germany and France..................................................... 5

Central Europes attitude............................................................................................................... 8

Cleavages between East and West along the two ideologies.................................................. 8

Conflicts between East and West in the Cold war..................................................................... 9

The enlargement of the European Communities.................................................................... 10

Cold-war and its consequences................................................................................................... 12

Crises and attitudes during the integration process.............................................................. 12

Brief overview of the development of the free movement of workers................................... 17

Creation of the European Economic Community, Treaties of Rome................................... 17

Single European Act...................................................................................................................... 19

Maastricht Treaty.......................................................................................................................... 19

Treaty of Amsterdam.................................................................................................................... 20

Treaty of Nice ................................................................................................................................. 20

Treaty of Lisbon............................................................................................................................. 21

Regional policy relevance................................................................................................................ 21

Treaties of Rome, the creation of the European Economic Community............................. 21

Single European Act...................................................................................................................... 22

Maastricht Treaty.......................................................................................................................... 23

Amsterdam Treaty........................................................................................................................ 23

Treaty of Nice ................................................................................................................................. 23

The Treaty of Lisbon..................................................................................................................... 24

Current situation, determining goals for the future................................................................... 24

The conclusions of regional politics.......................................................................................... 25

How to capitalise on the advantages disadvantages?............................................................ 25

References........................................................................................................................................... 27


3/27

3

Abstract

The analysis focalises on the current debate in the European Parliament and society, on

respect for the fundamental right of free movement in the EU. The aim is to better

understand the French, German and British attitude regarding the issue. What are the

main facts behind the current economical crisis? Which are the similar or quite similar

crises in the past? What is the consequence of the Cold War in the debates between

Eastern Europe and Western Europe? What are the historical wounds in the society?

It is important to see how France, Germany and the United Kingdom decide in the

integration process. To understand their attitude it is necessary to know how their

society was constructed before the creation of the EU.

The other important element is to understand the Central European point of view. The

Western society has no deep knowledge about this region and they dont comprehend

why there are so many debates on political and social questions in the new Member

States. Is this region the new cradle of rising nationalism? Or they want to know who

they are?

The comparison of the EU treaties helps to follow the attitude of the development of the

free movement of workers and the regional policy. What are the moments when there is

an overture to develop these issues and when is the period of obstacles to cut or

decrease them?

The current economical and social crisis needs to organise social debates on the future

of the European integration and the next enlargement towards the Balkans and Eastern

Europe. To achieve the aim the Member States have to be more open to each othershistory, social characteristics to act together in crisis situation too.


4/27

4

Introduction

The actuality of the topic is the deliberation of the movement of workers from Romania

and Bulgaria and the attitudes against this liberty. Romania and Bulgaria are members

of the European Union since 2007, but this fact did not mean the possibility of the use ofthe free movement of workers. One part of the member states used the restrictions

against the free movement of workers from Romania and Bulgaria. At the end of 2013

some articles were published against the realisation of this liberty1. The member states

with negative attitudes justified their opinion with the current economical problems.

They argued that the international crisis and the political tension linked with the

economical problems will be more serious after the arrival of the workers from the

newest Member States. It is important to examine the former attitude of the member

states with the negative opinion, and the attitude of the Member States who had not

negative opinion regarding the liberty of the free movement of workers. The

examination of the point of view regarding the topic is discussed on the case of France,the United Kingdom and Germany. My hypothesis is that the free movement of workers

facilitates the economical and political integration, the reduction of the difference of East

and West, the reduction of the migration due to the economical misery, and it can help to

make stronger the economy of the Member States.

This essay determines first the attitude of the three leader Member States, France,

Germany and the United Kingdom, than it shows the legal development of the free

movement of workers in the EU treaties. The third part presents the relevance of the

regional policy. It is important to present briefly the attitude of the Central European

area too. The last part presents the actual questions and some relevance of the present

and the future with concrete propositions. The topic is showed in three different

approaches. These approaches treat the repetition of the attitudes which have to be

changed before the next steps of the integration.

EU enlargement and the attitudes of the three big European countries, France,

Germany and the United Kingdom

In this part I try to find the answer to the following question: if we leave the opposition

Franco-German and the English intervention in this question, which are the other

driving forces to influent the history of the EU? What characterise the attitudes of

France, the UK and Germany regarding the immigrants? Lets examine the actualsituation and the path leading to current situation.

1Cameron: Free movement in EU needs to be less free, http://www.euractiv.com/uk-europe/cameron-

free-movement-eu-needs-f-news-531982, date of consultation 21/12/213Orange alert for eastern and central European workers, http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/news-brief/4067161-orange-alert-eastern-and-central-european-workers, date of consultation17/12/2013

German conservatives stir up 'welfare tourism' row, http://euobserver.com/social/122339, date ofconsultation 17/12/2013


5/27

5

The Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty presents the aims of the EU.2To achieve these aims it

is important to act at local and European level. To choose the best solution and the level

of acting it is important to examine thoroughly the expenses and the benefit of the

decisions. The enlargement of the EU has expenses but it has benefits too. The situation

resembles for the introduction of a new product into the market. Before the sale of the

product the enterprise has to invest a remarkable capital to develop it. The principle ofthe investments of the EU into the enlargement functions in a same way. The investors

determine the criteria, and the negotiation process of the accession treaty is a

possibility, not an obligation for the country to be Member State later. This is an

important fact, because in some cases the investors capital is interpreting as a gift. The

accession negotiation and the signature of the treaty dont mean equality for the joining

countries. The case of the free movement of workers is a good example to demonstrate

it. The half century in the Soviet Union exerted a negative influence on the economical

and political development of the Central European countries. The countries with

developed market economy, who determined the democratic requirements, have no

experience regarding this question. Otherwise the EU did not realise yet the aims whichwere fixed at the beginning of the European integration. The deadline for the realisation

of these aims is postponed for a later date (EU 2020, EU 2050). A useful negotiating

behaviour for the realisation of the important questions is not formed yet (during the

negotiation of the EU budget the Member States practice a market strategy and the aim

of the foundation of the EU has got lost). These aspects dont reflect the advantage

deriving from the historical fact, the lack of the negative effect of the Soviet Union. I did

research to understand the motivation of the Member State when there is a lot at stake.

The political and economical movement of three big countries, France, Germany and the

United Kingdom, determines the direction of the development of the EU. Their attitudes

have repetitive items in their decision-making within the EU. Fundamental truth is thatdecisions made in the past determine the present and the decision make in the present

influence strongly the future. This mechanism can be changed if the wrong decision-

making practice will be changed, and the leaders find new solutions regarding present

questions. Lets see the French, German and English standpoint regarding to the free

movement of workers if we remove the Franco-German conflict and British distance

policy.

The attitude of the United Kingdom, Germany and France

These three countries play a big role on the European stage. Small countries usually

follow the policy of the big countries, but it doesnt mean the loosing of their policy toignore their interests. The creation of the Benelux group is a great example to

demonstrate what happens when some countries being on similar level of development

but having various mentalities have to cooperate to achieve a goal. Belgium is a glaring

example to show how francophone/Latin mentality and Germanophone mentality work

2Lisbon Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML, date of consultation

5/01/ 2014


6/27

6

in the practice? With a lot of negotiations because this country is more famous for the

centrifugal forces, not for the realisation of their motto: Unity makes strengths. The role

of the King is still important to create the unity, but the EU has no King. Then what is

element of unity in the EU?3

In France, the ruling elite perceives the will of the people correctly. The consolidation of

the centralisation, the extension of the public administration, the warfare took away a

lot of energy to follow social changes and to react to it in time. Before the Enlightenment

the French nobility lived in a separate world from the people, they didnt notice the

opposite movements taking place among the people. Louis XVI finished his carrier by

this inattention. The next example is the period of the colonisation. The domestic

indebtedness and having of a luxurious, expensive leader lifestyle which is insensitive

for the domestic economical problems, and the heavy taxation of the people, which

restrained a part of the available capital for investments, needed to have a solution at a

certain point. The subjugation of African peoples and using their labour helped relatively

to replenish the treasury. But the daily life, the wellbeing of the people living in the

colonies was not important for the French leaders. They used a monoculture plan in the

colonies, which obstructed the countries from the healthy development way. The

disappearance of the balance had a heavy cost later. At a certain point keeping the

colonies in the old way was not a good solution, but there was no good scenario to

manage the situation. This was the antecedent of the independence. Of course, the

freedom did not go easily, and France had to look for some reason to not lose the

prestige. Actually there are a lot of immigrants in France, but there is no minority policy

in the country, everybody is French. The question is that what is the driving force in the

people covered by the artificial uniformity? The French attitude regarding the topic of

the essay is that they dont let in new people for the labour market, and they voted for

the transition period of closing for 7 years. But the French subsidiaries are present in the

Central European area and they have profit from the entry of the new Member States to

the EU.

The United Kingdom is an island country. This fact has a consequence that the territorial

limits imply the limits of the population. There is not enough space to build houses

everywhere because they need to keep field to agriculture or to create the transport

network. The advantage of the fact to be an island is that the country is less affected in

war situation and they can construct the defence easier. The English colonial policy was

more rational. The aim was to have goods to maintain the British Empire. The leaders

paid attention to the will of the people in the colonies too, and the British island wasreally the cold head leader of the British colonial empire. That did not mean the kind

treatment in every case, but the survival of the British Commonwealth is a good example

to prove the British rationality. The attitude of the island is to create rational limits for

the immigrants. They did not vote against the free movement of workers, but they

3Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the international institutions and organizations,LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest, 2006, p. 123


7/27

7

indicated the political and economical problems before opening the labour market. This

is the situation in the present too, but now the British political elite use a very unlucky

method, because the EU citizens who dont live in UK cant be causes of the actual

problems.

Germany had no significant role in the first wave of the colonisation. The country was

under unification. The unification of the provinces in such way that they could keep their

relative independence demonstrates the attitude of the German planning and precision.

For the reason of having no colonies they developed a Europe plan. The execution of the

investments, developments, the market acquisition needed to be done in a way which

did not indicate huge wave of migration because the country had a given capacity. That

was a reason to ensure a relatively good standard of living in the areas of investment.

The immigration was regulated by a precise determination of the number and the area

for the migrants. Their working speed is hard and they require the precise work from a

CEO as well as from a sweeper. The selection of the workers is easy, if they work hard

they can stay, if not, they can go back to their country or look for another opportunity in

another country. Their attitude is to be winner in long-term and stable way. They wage

guest workers, but reasonably, keeping in mind the stable functioning of the country.

The Marshall plan, after the World War II with the aim to buy a market4, exercised an

interesting influence for the three countries. France and the United Kingdom had no

seeking a financial source for investments. But the division of Germany had a different

result than what was expected. The situation of the UK is different from France, because

London was a money market centre and the language is the same as in USA. The way of

thinking is quiet similar so the communication drawback was less than in France where

the language and the way of thinking is very different. In the case of the UK the problem

was that the former colony, the US had the leading role to determine the Europeanhistory. Lets see the German case. The aim of the division and occupation was to

prevent that the German economy will be too strong. There were only two problems

with this plan, but they were indigestible. First aim was that Germany loses its

economical strength. But keeping open a wound (to construct the Berlin wall) ever bear

in mind the injustice. I dont want to explain who was right because the winners write

the rules and Germany lost the war. The attitude of different countries has importance to

examine the consequences in the present situation. The second problem was that the

Germans had a plan for Europe and they realised it. There were other European dream

too but they were not realised. If the German economy does collapse, than the European

reconstruction will be hard. The US administration saw this problem and they changedthe strategy.

4Une reconstruction conomique, http://www.histoiredumonde.net/Une-reconstruction-

economique.html, date of consultation 06/01/2014


8/27

8

Central Europes attitude

Lets look at a few of the joining countries. Most of them were under the Soviet Union.

Cyprus and Malta were British mandate. They were free and had the self-determination

a long time ago. They had no chance to have free economy and policy. One part of their

force was use to maintain their history, culture, language identity. The foreign flag and

foreign anthem were use to unify the people but in their home one part of the families

kept the original identity. In fact, the Soviet melting pot project failed, but the freed

peoples have learned to persevere and be faithful, work hard. But the healing of the

wound caused by the First World War does not work. This is the current weakness in

Central and Eastern Europe. But the presence of the self-consciousness can be the

indicator of the common investments between the CEE countries instead of the insults of

each other.

Lets see where is the problem with the restriction of the free movement of workers or

the lack of the unified social policy between Member States. If someone loses his job and

he demand a State aid, he receives it for 3 month and then if he could not find a job hehas to go back to his country. This is not a problem because the worker is looking for a

job, not social benefit. We can classify the workers in two groups. One group consists of

the workers with a carrier aim; the other contains the workers who leave the country

because of the economical difficulties. Their attitudes are different. Workers belonging

to the first group are not forced to choose, they have the chance to try different

possibilities and then decide to stay or go back to the original country. But workers in

the second group have to keep the job abroad, because their aim is to earn money, to

send money to the family. The attitude is determined by the economical constraint. They

dont want use social benefits. The official European statistics show that the number of

the migrant from Central Europe is about 1% of the population.

Cleavages between East and West along the two ideologies

The two part of Europe were rebuilt by two different ideologies. The promotion of the

American consumer society in the Western part, and the soviet collectivism in the

Eastern part determined the construction of the economical structure. The US invested a

huge capital into the European reconstruction and they expected to have a remarkable

profit from this business. The reconstruction of the countries based largely on

independent individuals who can and want to work independently, the US didnt need to

invest in their training. The soviet system was also profit-oriented to realise the

economical aims, but they didnt leave intuitive persons to live alone. In the Soviet campthe freedom of the independent ideology was not an aim. Ideologically the happiness of

the individual was draw up, but it was never realised.

Considering the impact of the freedom and the prosperity of the individual in the

Western society has resulted and individualistic society. The social bonding strength as

a base was not applied.


9/27

9

Countries with strong identities can assert national interest, but they cannot always put

it into practice because of the impact of the individualism. The Soviets forced

collectivisation had a double impact on society. Firstly, there was a layer of people who

found the solution to have the cooperation with power in an economically successful

way. The other group chose to keep the national identity against the soviet identity,

risking not having a carrier and the economical security.

Lets have a look to the French, German and English attitude regarding the European

reconstruction. One of the key elements of the French attitude is the promotion of the

French language and culture. The French linguistic logic is different from the English

one. These two facts were the reason for the distance keeper attitude which did not help

the integration process. The former German-French opposition was transformed into

English-French debate. Of course France and the United Kingdom took care to restrain of

the political empowerment of Germany.

The British had no linguistic problems. But the American quick lifestyle was different to

the English cold blood. The Americans found quickly new solutions, innovative ideas andthey tested them in the practice and if it was necessary, they changed the strategy. This

flexibility was not an English specific. Contrary they accepted hardly that the former

disciple outgrew the former master.

In the case of Germany there was a historical repetition. The country was divided again.

This fact resulted the aim for the reunification in short term. This plan was not

supported in Western circles. Politically the German interest was to take a position in

favour of the European integration and keep the German identity at home.

Conflicts between East and West in the Cold war

Lets see what are the wounds in Central Europe received from the West during the Cold

war, and which are forgotten in the fact of integration. The basis is that neither West nor

East developed according to their own interests. The two superpowers confrontation

resulted several conflicts. However, the integration process will ultimately suffer the

consequences of that. In Hungary, the 1956 revolution and war of independence was a

major event when we asked for help from the West. Poland has repeatedly experienced

the breakdown, loss of independence. In the Soviet era, the Polish quest for

independence manifested itself several times (the Poznan workers 'strike in 1956; the

student revolution in 1967; workers' revolution in 1969; the establishment of the Solidarity

movement in 1980). In the case of the Czech Republic events prior the Cold Wardetermined the EU scepticism. The events like Munich treaty (1938) or the creation of

Czechoslovakia (impeding the path of independent development of the two nations)

resulted the lack of trust for West or for East. The case of Slovakia is the most instable.

This country was independent during very short periods, but was part of other alliances

of countries. The late nation building has a strong impact in the present history too.


10/27

10

The lack of the processing of the history not only caused injustices to the west, but also

in the Central European region. These misunderstand escalated during the EU

negotiations.

The enlargement of the European Communities

The first enlargement process was in 1973. Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdomjoined to the European Communities. The big movements were leading by France and

Germany. At the start of the European Economical Community the UK decided to not be

part. Then the UK formed his own economical cooperation, the EFTA. But the success of

the EEC and the US investments enervated the British economical plans. The UK decided

to join to the EEC. But the great rival, France has not given its consent so easily. After the

Second World War, the Germans had remained politically in silence and paid attention

to the economic reestablishment. The reason was not only the war period but also the

fact that Germany was again in front of a reunification.

France as a winner, forgetting the fact that alone would not have the chance to be free

from its captivity, politically reached a dominant position. The English presence in this

dance was not really necessary. General de Gaulle was significantly against the British

joining, which strengthened the British restraining attitude. Shortly after joining they

started to fight with the French. The casus belli was the agricultural policy. The United

Kingdom paid contribution to support among others the common agricultural policy, but

as this is an industrial country, they had not benefits for this policy. They werent in the

European club at the beginning. Those who arrive later in the club have to adapt. But the

British showed that they are strong in case of a business questions. The EEC was a

business question. They won in the question of the rebate. Meanwhile, the Germans,

keeping in mind the purpose of the union, built their country quietly, or relatively

quietly. It is important to note that was a conflict between two national interests on the

community table. The support for the agriculture is good for France; the rebate is good

for the UK. Greece joined in the atmosphere of the oil crises and the national

protectionism. The country is not noted for its economical and fiscal obedience but after

the collapse of the dictatorship it was better to have them inside than outside. However,

Spain and Portugal had to wait in the doorway until the Member States organised their

internal conflicts, and considered to continue with the building of Europe.

The German persistence and the end of the Soviet era in the history leaded to the unique

enlargement, the German reunification. Since this point Germany had a very important

priority: the realisation of the social and economical integration of the country.Meanwhile the EEC was transformed into EU, and three new Member States joined:

Austria, Finland and Sweden. The new Member States had developed economy and

stable society. With Austria the German spheres of interest has grown, but the Austrian

internal events linked to the extreme rights policy in 2000 evoked bad memories. As

Austria was Member State, it was no question to dragging the accession process. The

three big countries have no special position on this fact. But the Austrian events


11/27

11

triggered a reaction. The new Member States domestic politics echoed across Europe.

The political turning urging the national strengthening didnt favour the current

situation of the minorities and didnt draw a positive message for the immigrants. The

EU confronted a problem in-house, which was not typical situation. Although the

German-French relation is not without problems, but the Austrian nationalist rhetoric,

which had a connotation of the Second World War, shocked the Community tired of thenational wrestling. Suddenly it was no evident what decision could be good, lock out a

Member State or intervention of its internal policy? As every decision has a

consequence, if the three big countries decide to lock out a country, they could find

themselves in the same situation. Or if they make an intervention in the internal policy

question, they give a possibility to other countries to do the same method. The attention

to treatment of the open wounds got lost in the economical bargaining. Austria, which

was in the periphery of the EU, had to solve more problems than the old Member States.

They had to stop the migrants on the border, and it is not only a financial question. If

with the EU opening a flow of migrants gets moving, that route is through Austria. But if

someone doesnt want to continue the trip to West, he stays in this country and itchanges the current national proportion. The situation was the same after the beating

the Hungarian revolution in 1956. France, Germany and the UK seem to be able to forget

the historical lesson. Austria was on the EU periphery close to the Soviet Union. The

periphery usually is less preferred area to develop. This attitude is present in the

European regional policy too.

In 2004 ten new Member States arrived, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland, Latvia,

Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia. Among the joining countries there

were two islands, Cyprus which is divided, Malta, which was British mandate. The

Nordic group, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had economical problems, but the Russian

presence was the real problem and this is the problem in the present situation too.

There is Slovenia, which is a developed country. Hungary, Czech Republic, Poland and

Slovakia form the Visegrad group.

The countries had to wait 14 years, after their independence, before joining the EU. This

was a long period, because the countries expected Western Europes joy for the

reunification. But the Western countries were careful, on one hand they learnt the lesson

from the former joining periods but on the other hand they didnt realise the joining

countries specifics. The offered joining package was created regarding the other

countries problems. But the Central European countries had other problems to solve.

They would like to find their identity after the 50 years of socialism and having oneidea. Their national questions were attacked by the Western countries in the European

platform. The strong identity is a good tool to create a strong society if it respects the

differences of others. The Central European countries had to find their identity, rebuild

the economy, learn the healthy self-determination and believe that if they set an aim,

they can achieve without central instructions. In parallel of these tasks they had to learn

thinking with Western brain. This conflict could be understood by Germany because of


12/27

12

the reunification of the Western and Eastern parts, which was not only a financial

question.

Cold-war and its consequences

During the cold-war the two parts of Europe had the attitude of opposition. This

evidence characterises the present political-economical atmosphere too. For the Central-European countries it is difficult to follow the American-Western way of thinking. For

the Western countries it is difficult to understand the refusal attitude of the Central-

European countries in the questions which is similar to centralisation, a planned

economy or the controlling mechanism. Why they are so sensitive to determine

themselves what to do and dont be attacked in certain rapport. But the Central-

European area has no long-term experience in understanding what does mean:

negotiation on its merits, cooperation, planning common purposes, realisation of them.

The rapports are not evidently the consequence of procedures, but to see how the plans

are, what the realities are, what is good and what doesnt work.

Very important fact is that the countries interests are determined by the specificities of

the societies. The society of the Western Countries is rather individualist, the society of

the Central European is rather communal but not in the sense of collectivism. Thats a

reason why it is difficult to build the European melting-pot. If a country is more

individualist, then keeping the common heritage, history, culture is a problem. If the

country is more communal, then the individual has a problem with the creation of his

own personal limits. Where is our place in the community and who we are individually?

Where are the limits to respect? How can we understand the way of others if we didnt

live the same experience?

Crises and attitudes during the integration process

1. Crisis: The creation of the European communitiesFrance was defeated in the Second World War but with external help it was sitting at the

winners table. The fact of losing the war was difficult to digest for a former leading

country. Germany has lost the Second World War too, and its territory was divided, one

part belonged to west, the other to east. But for the reconstruction of Europe the

German help was needed. On one hand the German planning and execution were very

important method for ensuring the necessary resources and the stable rhythm of the

construction. The American capital expected that the former enemies negotiate and

make a decision. The leaders of France and Germany had good attitudes to negotiate the

European integration. The stabilisation of the long-term future was important for them.

They didnt want all immediately. It is important to see who were the players and their

background. Robert Schumann, the delegate of France, came from Lotharingia.

Schumann experienced in his life the differences and the similarities between French

and German identity. He spoke German too, which was very important to better

understand the German way of thinking.


13/27

13

Konrad Adenauer was for finding the French-German common points too. In his life

there was an important moment which had determined his attitude having the ambition

to create the peace and the rational cooperation. As a German citizen he was arrested by

the Gestapo. This trauma helped him to understand that the German economy and policy

had to be rebuilt in a way which helped to reconstruct the country but avoid the war.

Jean Monnet was a trader, and during his activity he acquired a vast international

experience. Among others he learnt the American negotiation and investing method. As

a trader he learnt when it is necessary to come to the front and when it is better to draw

back. He applied perfectly this knowledge when his collateral work with Schumann got

into the history as Schumann-plan.

Their common attitude was to be a strong patriot and they decided to use it for the

construction of Europe and not conserving the fragmentation after the war.

2. Crisis: the British point of viewThe United Kingdom didnt want a narrow European alliance. They aim was rebuilding

the common market, in according with the British negotiation method. For the British

negotiators it was difficult to discuss and seating on the same level with their former

war enemies at the negotiating table. But as they needed commercial partners, they

established an alternative plan, the foundation of the European Free Trade Association.

They needed to prove their leadership in Europe after the strengthening of US. Dont

forget that in this historical period the colonies were still present.

3. Crisis: The movement of freedom of the coloniesFrance and the United Kingdom were touched sensitively; they lost their great power

status. A country needs to demonstrate that it is successful. The rich man buy car for this

reason and the countries try to expand their territory. For France this was the second

trauma after the fact that they had to cooperate with Germany. For the United Kingdom

losing their colonies was the trauma as well as the lost of the role of the leader. After this

period it was hard to keep in mind the importance for the cooperation with the

Germans. Germany has lost the war but won Europe?

4. Crisis: The adhesion of the UK in 1971If you do not join into the club when you are invited, you not only have to adapt to the

rules made without you, but maybe you cant get in. De Gaulle taught this lesson with

the two refusals of the British demand of joining. This fact increased the British Euro

scepticism. But it is difficult to build a goal if the player doesnt want it. In international

context we are two years before the first oil crisis. The European Community was

cracked by these reasons. The consequence of the oil crises was the slowdown of the

flow of the American capital to Europe. Europe had to pay the cost time of the internal

fight, which had to be used for the construction.


14/27

14

5. Crisis: Oil crises (1973, 1979), the collapse of the Bretton Woods systemThe world economy was under collapse. The Americans risked a lot and they almost lost

everything. The consequence of the oil crises was the shortage of raw materials. They

had to pay much more to one barrel of oil, and one part of capital to investments was

transferred into net expenses. The oil as energy source was reduced on the market, and

this fact broke the dynamism of the economy. Behind the dollar there was not enough

gold stock to ensure its value. The Europeans, because they didnt build a strong

economy by using the American capital based the available sources, become paralysed.

The US was able to react quickly and it kept its supremacy. The European leaders didnt

wake up to build the stable European market. They started to lead protectionist policy.

There is no balance between the national building and the European construction. They

didnt learn this method of unification from the US. The standards, the

telecommunication, the transport network were unified in the US as the base of the

internal market. In Europe for these questions have no answers, and the countries lead

protectionist policy which has a negative attitude for the enlargement process too. The

distrust of the countries causes more damage than the economical crises. If they dont

believe in the European dream, they cant realise it. Keep in mind the attitude of the

distrust; it will appear during the enlargement process later.

6. Crisis: Enlargement with Greece, Spain and PortugalThese three countries have a common historical fact, they were liberated under

dictatorship. But the dictatorships have no success in society- and economy-building.

One of the most characteristic is that the political elite is far from the people, it isnt

sensitive to the willing and movement of the people. From this fact they ended by a

consequence of an initiative coming from below. The takeover was done, but problems

of the development caused by the dictatorship needed to be treated. Greece came into

the EC in 1981, but Spain and Portugal had to wait before the door because of the ECs

internal problems. France had a problem, to not to be agricultural hegemony because

Spain and Portugal were agricultural countries. France had to share the agricultural

financial sources. Besides this fact the flow of the workers started from the poor

countries to the old Member States. Keep in mind that there was a big unemployment

rate in the old Member States too. The refusal attitude came to the front in the old

Member States too. The lesson, which was learnt too late, was that the end of a

dictatorship was good but its better to stabilise a country before inviting it to join into

the EC. This lesson was later applied during the negotiations with the Central-European

countries.

7. Crisis: the case of AustriaAustria joined in 1995 to the EC with a stable political, social and economical situation. It

seemed to be a quite period in the EU for the construction without internal crisis. But

the Western countries, forgetting the repetition of the history, experienced with surprise

the events of Austria in 2000. They needed to react, quickly, which is not the strengths of


15/27

15

these countries. If they exclude Austria, they become excluded. If they invent in the

internal policy of Austria, they make possible the same intervention against their

decision too. And the exclusion of a Member State is the confession that they were not

able to prepare well the adhesion procedure and documents, the country rapport

showing the real situation. The mistakes of the past will be paid by new candidate

countries instead of the reparation of the preparation periods process. The preparationof the next crisis started.

8. Crisis: the collapse of the Soviet Union, the liberation of Central-Europe.The end of the Soviet Union meant the end of one moving power of the European

integration, the big enemy. Its nature was known by the US and Germany. Better by the

US, because the two big entities did not exist independently of each other, they tested

their force in the third world (cf Vietnam War, Korean War). Europe was late to influence

the history because the conflict of the MS took too much force to build Europe and set

the aim of the cohesion and the power rising from the tensions will be transformed to

the force of the creation. The Central European area indicated the will of the joining andbecoming part of the European integration. They were numerous, poor, fragmented

economically and socially. The fatigue was present in the societies, the bitterness of the

practical experience that if they wanted to develop then they were blocked economically

and sometimes by the foreign army. But they believed that at this point their aim was

the reality. The adhesion procedure started, but they had to pay the price of the mistakes

of the former adhesion period. They had to find quickly their own identity, aims, place in

the big common camp, the relation from east and west, the economical consolidation, to

forgot the Soviet teaching, to understand the Western teaching. The capital, the goods

and the services came into the CEE but the free movement of workers was very limited

for the Western part of Europe. Austria and Germany permitted in some sectors to theCEE workers to work but this was good first of all for the economy of this countries.

France was against to open its labour market. Its aim was to find a solution for the

people coming from the former French colonies. The UK was not against the opening the

labour market but it created rational economical limits. The small interference of the

most sensitive freedom resulted the attitude against the EU. In sharp economical

situation the Member States closed the gates and forgot the common aim. In the Central

European countries economical problems dont cause difficulties; they had the

experience of having two jobs for a relative normal life and working in the garden if the

salary was not enough for buying food, etc. But the ignorance and the indifference of the

democratic western countries was a shock to this area.

9. Crisis: the present situationThe EU is before important changes. Since present time there is no realised aim, no

common internal market, and no equality in the practice for the European citizens, no

unified Europe. This is a basic competition disadvantage in opposition of the US. The US,

which realised its aims to have an internal market, is able to react quickly and stable. But


16/27

16

the EU conserved the cleavages and in a case of a sudden movement the system can fail.

But now the EU has no time to thinking a lot before acting. The aims, which were

neglected to achieve, have to be realised parallel and quickly. The lesson from the past

has to be understood and new attitudes have to apply. The tension among nations has to

be treated. The EU has to go back to the roots and treat the situation as a whole, not

focalise only partial questions and lost in the details. Finding solutions of these partialquestions dont resolve the problem of the misunderstanding. Instead of determining

new aims the EU has to resolve the initial aims. The answer has to be found from the

question: are these aims important now? If yes, where are the critical points of their

realization? What are the causes and how to go on? The sober communication of the two

part of Europe is very necessary on equal basis. The treatment of the former crises as

showed by Helmut Kohl and Francois Mitterrand in 1984 could be very helpful. Their

behaviour showed that wounds are healing up slowly and they needed to ensure each

other for the will of the cooperation for achieve the real, deep alliance. The solution done

for the Second World War resulted more damage than it is evident at the moment.

The Central European region is also prone in the crisis turning inwards, and thatoverstates the strength. In the Member States it is very important to choose vital

political leaders who, like the German - French co-operation, go to the negotiating tableand are serious about reconciliation. This would free up forces to settle the commonexperience, and on this base a common Central European development can be built. It isnot enough to receive EU funds to the development, but development in the Central

European region is important between the countries. If countries build cooperation

among them, the Central European economic situation will be stable. Economicsettlement of the German and French opposition finally get his way on the two countriesto coordinate often and they do not seek a treatment like the possibility of war in the

conflict. The EU will not give meaningful answers in political and social point of view to

the Central European problems. It is the responsibility of the Central European states. Itis necessary to finish the displays of the problems on the European scene. Theeconomical interests will use these fault lines to take advantage for them. On the single

market the competition is not unforgettable. The specificities of the European Union are

to create economic competition out of doors and in-house.The EU has a specific formation, this is in the constantly change of its extent, population,economic weight. This is not typical in the case of the competitors. Russia, China, Japan

and the US have no many variables, so their strength can be given to economic

competition rather than the EU. Now with the opening for the Balkans the EU is facingan important decision. The situation is much more sensitive than in previous accessions.In the Balkans China, Russia, US, Arab states are present and the EU a bit as well. The

Balkans is a part of Europe, but it is a particular word with a lot of wounds. There was

not enough time to heal them. There is an artificial peace in this area withoutunderstanding the history and the specificities of these countries. The EU has alreadycommitted some serious errors (Bosnia - Herzegovina conflict, the Kosovo issue, the issueof treatment of war criminals), so it will be difficult to convince countries that they wantthem to join to the EU. The EU's aim is to unite Europe. To realise this aim, the

knowledge and the experience of the Central European countries are important. Theyknow the meaning of an artificial multi-national state formation, and how hard it is tofind the own identity again after the collapse of it in the continued presence and


17/27

17

influence of the big countries. If the Balkans will not be part of European Union, then the

initial aim will be not realised.

Brief overview of the development of the free movement of workers

This part of the research focalise on the main problem is how were the four freedoms

created, what kind of importance was attached to the free movement of the workers inthe founding treaties. Building the foundation of the European Community began tocreate the four freedoms. The four freedoms are the free movement of goods, capital,

services and free movement of labour. In short it is useful to have a look of their nature.In the case of goods we can conclude that the workforce plays a significant role in the

production. In the case of capital we can conclude that a part of it comes from the sale ofgoods, which is closely linked to labour practices. In the case of the service is clear againthat it cannot be realised without the involvement of the workforce. The labour force

needs to be part in the productivity of one of the three liberties listed above. However noone of the three freedoms can be achieved without labour, the labour force has theliberty to choose with what freedom it will be unfolding. From this fact we can draw theconsequences that restrictions on the free movement of labour in the EU is the obstacle

of the development.The study is based on regulating the establishment of the EEC Treaty of Rome. Than itexamine the relevant part of the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, theAmsterdam Treaty, the Nice Treaty, and finally the chapters of the Lisbon Treaty.

Creation of the European Economic Community, Treaties of Rome

In 1957, a contract was signed, which laid down the principles of establishing a common

market. The engine for the development was the creation of the four freedoms. The four

freedoms are free movement of persons, goods, services and capital flows. We are afterthe Second World War, the period of the reconstruction of the Western part of Europe.

Among the four freedoms the capital is the less available and the labour force is the mostavailable. The capital flows from the U.S. to Western Europe under the Marshall

program. The U.S. induced investment by capital in the region. The nature of the capitalis that it flows to the place where it can be multiplied within the framework ofinvestment. The US, by the capital investments, determined significantly the direction of

the development, the attitude of the consumer society. Significant power was invested in

the promotion of the American way of life. The impact of the war affected also thepeoples attitude, it was very attractive for them to get a job, receive income and theyhad chance to control their lives and the uncertainty was reduced (in the war there wereseveral elements of uncertainty, for example a bomb slamming into the building and a lost

of house which was before a kind of stability). The Article 3c) of the EEC Treaty speaksfirst about the movement of persons. It states that to achieve the aims of the Treaty theabolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons,services and capital5 is important; The Article 5 provides that Member States shall take

all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of theobligations arising out of this Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions ofthe Community. They shall facilitate the achievement of the Communitys tasks. They

shall abstain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objections

5http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 15/01/2014


18/27

18

of this Treaty6. The Article 7 disposes the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of

nationality, but this fact can be maintained under certain conditions. It is importantbecause the sensibility of the freedom of the workers is the biggest among the other

freedoms. In the other case the sensibility factor is not so big. The good is sensitive also,especially not durable goods. The service is also sensitive, as it depends on the market

demand. The capital is also sensitive, as it seeks to place at relatively low risk to achieve

a profit growth. But these sensitivities move on one axis, they can be calculated from thetrends of reduction or growth. In contrast, the sensitivity of the employee is morecomplexes. The same working conditions and the same wages do not make the same

effectiveness in the productivity of workers. The quality of life and social embeddednesscan significantly affect the efficiency of the productivity. The Treaty and its

implementation were a success story till the 70s. But then the U.S. oil dependence andthe outbreak of the crisis had significant impact on the Western European countries andthe EEC was well. Protectionist measures have been taken in the EEC countries. The

capital has not flow as before and the labour forces had a surplusage, the unemploymentrate augmented. The German - French cooperation and co- thinking also slowed.The period from 1957 to 1979 to establish a stable market was not enough for theWestern European economy and in crisis situation the protectionism was reinforce not

the community way of thinking. Among the non -tariff barriers the lack of the uniformityof the professional qualifications was highlighted and the restrictions on the freemovement of labour. Merely the decision that a country adopts a decision that cannotreceive workforce doesnt lead into a crisis but in Europe the former warring parties

blocked each other, and it amplified sensitivity. The protectionism was a very negative

impact to the European dreams realisation. The increasing economic difficulties as wellas the national attitude of opposition leaded to the intensification of extremist politicaltendencies. The discharge of the voltage resulted in world war minimally in two cases.

One of the most prominent fighters of the unification of Europe was Jacques Delors, who

was working to give the right direction to the energy issuing the tensions betweenMember States to transform them into the energy of the creation. One of the results of

this huge work was the birth of the Single European Act in 1987. At this point we areclose to the breakdown of the Soviet Union where the change of the capacity was slower

than the will of the people and as a result, the imperial system collapsed. WesternEurope was characterised in 1980 by a massive unemployment rate.The post-war economy was not strong enough for mass employment, and the lack of

capital prevented the creation of jobs. Luxembourg compromise proposed by the French

(1966) has hindered the important issues of cooperation between Member States, tothinking in Europe, not preferring the realization of national interests. To the creation ofthe big marker the majority voting has been introduced7. The importance of the fourfreedoms of movement and freedom of movement of persons was confirmed. Meanwhile

three countries have joined the community. But in these countries the economy and thepolitical system were not really stable. It was expected intensification of the movementof the workers towards the more developed western countries but they needed alsostrengthening of their own economies. The economical actors leaded an intensive lobby

and they established the European Round Table of Industrialists in 1983 to achieve theiraims. They wanted to reduce the capital dependence from the US and to reinforce their

6http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 15/01/2014

7Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the international institutions and organizations,

LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest, 2006, p. 130


19/27

19

role in the market. Do not forget that at this time there was a relative lack of capital and

oversupply of labour. The three new Member States (Greece, Spain and Portugal) weresensitive in economic term and they didnt participate in the economic development

since 1957. The workforce coming from these countries was increasingly sensitive to thenegative behaviour of wealthier countries.

Single European Act

The second chapter of the Act provides for an amendment to the EEC Treaty (Article 13).

The Article 13 confirms the importance of the internal market and the four freedoms asits base. In order to facilitate the functioning of the internal market several cases have

been expanding in which the Council decides by qualified majority. Measures relating tothe free movement of persons and workers' rights and interests remained in themeasure requiring a unanimous decision. The Article 100 of the EEC Treaty was

completed a with the proviso that the Member State has the right to turn to theCommission in the case if it states that measures in the Treaty contained an adverseimpact on their inner workings. One of the examples is including arrangements for theprotection of its labour market (Article 100, paragraph 4). It is concluded that the

importance of the four freedoms is present but the distrust of foreign workers is presentas well and there is no suggestions to transform one part of the labour force to realise aframework of development to complete the better application of the freedom ofworkers. Let's see what kind of progress we see in Maastricht.

Maastricht Treaty

The initial paralysis in the 80s and the industrial and political lobby gave wings to the

development of the EU. The EEC was transformed into European Union, thus indicating

that the integration into a higher stage. At the national level, this was the period ofeconomic opening time and the privatisation wave. The functioning of the internal

market was improved. The economic growth improved the quantity of the labour forceand entailed the quality of the work. But the EU and the Member States had to change

their attitudes to maintain the developing period. The EU has to be closer to the EUcitizens. The Maastricht Treaty founded the concept of EU citizenship. Union citizenshipdoes not replace national citizenship but complete it. The aim of the attractive gesture

was expected that the person meet with less rejection than in previous years. Respect

for people and workers can have a positive impact on achievement of the objectives setout in the preamble, such as in the context of strengthened social cohesion and economicdevelopment, and economic integration.The Article 2 of the first title outlines the objectives of the union which includes "the

promotion of a high level of employment8" to, strengthen the protection of the rightsand interests of nationals of Member States through the introduction of a citizenship ofthe Union9", "the free movement of persons10 in. The Article 6 paragraph 1 is alsonoteworthy. It states that "(1) The Union is founded on freedom, democracy, the rule of

8Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of

consultation 08/01/20149Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of

consultation 08/01/201410

Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of



20/27

20

law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, principles which are

common to the Member States11. The common currency, the euro, which has a positiveimpact on the economy, has born. The common economic and monetary union can have

a positive impact on the free movement of labour. The investors can easier compare thecosts of the labour in the same currency. The common currency can decrease also the

long-term investment risk. The so-called Maastricht criteria are also designed to ensure

the stability of national economies and uniform comparative basis.The strengthening of national economies and maintain them at a sustainable level isgood for the EU. On one hand the common budget cannot be spend to rescue-package.

On the other hand with strong national economies the migration of the labour force duethe economical misery can be decreased. The migration due to the personal

development can be increased, and the qualified workforce increases the economicallevel at European level as well. The Treaty states that it is necessary to ensure the fourfreedoms of the internal market (Part I, Common Provisions, Article 3, c). It also states

that internal measures are necessary to ensure the entry of persons into the internalmarket. Measures for employees have been retained unchanged the wording of thetreaty of Rome (Title III, Chapter 1, Article 48-51.).

Treaty of Amsterdam

The next important step is the Amsterdam Treaty, which entered into force in 1999.Meanwhile, in 1995, three countries, Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the EU. These

countries had good economic performances and they balanced the effect of the

difficulties of the previous three accession countries. The European map has drawn onover 10 years after the collapse of the Soviet empire. The Central European countries,becoming independent, organically joined into the western economy. During the pre-

accession programs development funds came into the area, not given as a gift, but to

influence the way of the development of these countries. The aim of the migration of theworkforce is mostly Germany, Austria and the UK. The Western countries expected a

huge wave of migration from Central Europe after the accession, but finally it has nevercame true. The EU needs to strengthen economically and politically the Central

European region. Not only to avoid the migration of the workforce but to continue theexpansion for the Balkans and Eastern Europe. To strengthening Europe the MemberStates have to harmonise their labour policies (Employment chapter, Article 109n-

109s). Just a few years separates the greatest enlargement of the Union, which certainly

seemed to be a bold step. But before that the Nice Treaty has been born.

Treaty of Nice

Austria in the 2000s was famous. The domestic politics of the young Member State had agreat echo across Europe. The country at the border in the former Soviet empire metfirst the mass migration phenomenon the 1956 revolution and freedom. The nextoccasion was the opening of the border due to the Pan-European Picnic, when the East

German citizens en masse crossed the Austrian border. However, the third time he didnot want to relive the same experience. Given the fact that Austria was Member Stateneeded to find a way to thinking together. In Nice to strengthen the community

11Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of



21/27

21

collaboration was a very important question. For the Central European countries this

kind of reactions against the enlargement was a huge slap in the face. Especially becausein Western Europe the people could travel freely between countries, whereas it was not

so easy in the Soviet Union. If on the verge of joining the attitude against the citizensfrom Central Europe was so violent, the countries cannot expected the respect for

human rights, the freedom of speech in practice and it can be a negative impact on the

attitude of the people. It is important to keep in mind that only 10 years have passedsince the democratic transition. The Central European countries did not really have achance to find their own way. The Central European countries had no time to find their

place in the world, to reliving their history and rich culture. The leaders of the pre-enlargement countries had no experience of the life in a closed camp. The historical

influences deeply ingrain in people's memory and the Treaty of European Unionaccession negotiation cannot be called just two equal semi- bargaining process. TheMember States during the Nice Treaty procession have lost a part of their independence,

but finally they realised it. The line will eventually close by the Lisbon Treaty.

Treaty of Lisbon

The treaty entered into force in 2009. TFEU, concerning the workers noted only onechange in the Article 48 (previous 42), which one Member of the Council provides that ameasure will affect important aspects of its social security system of given MemberState, it has the option to indicate this fact. In terms of employment there are no

substantial changes in the provisions.

Regional policy relevance

In this section, I analyse the usefulness of free movement in the light of regional policy

and ask what the positive and negative effects are. The presentation will lead youthrough the change in the EU treaties.

Treaties of Rome, the creation of the European Economic Community

The importance of regional differences has appeared in the Treaty of Rome. Thefounding countries formulated to reduce the importance of regional differences. In this

achievement the four basic freedoms (capital, labour, goods and services) play an

important role. The problem of regional disparities accompanies the Europeanintegration. The founding countries, in Paris in 1972, made a decision to extend financialtools to eliminate the regional and structural differences. They established the EuropeanBank to provide funds for development.

The preamble to the EC Treaty states:Anxious to strengthen the unity of their economies and to ensure their harmoniousdevelopment by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and thebackwardness of the less favoured regions...have decided to create a European Economic

Community12". The purpose of the founding countries was the unification of Europe.This is confirmed in the preamble of the subsequent contracts. So we can conclude thatthe goal has not changed. This will be really important later.

The Article 2 says:

12Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 14/12/2013


22/27

22

The Community shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and

progressively approximating the economic policies of Member States, to promotethroughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities, a

continuous and balanced expansion, and increase in stability, an accelerated raising ofthe standard of living and closer relations between the States belonging to it.13

More sophisticated approaches are not included in the contract. The peripheral areas

within the country and also within the realms were under-represented, which notmeans simply economic differences, but the difference in the society was dominant aswell. The fact, that the interests of the people living there are not as important as the

other part of country, started two types of process. On the one hand the discontentarising from the neglect feeling, on the other hand that, if there is no support from the

centre than citizens should be able to develop their own initiatives. If the powerfulaspect will be stronger than the negative aspect, a growth path can be realised which isbased on the local situation.

Single European Act

Lets see what was the impact of the Euro sclerosis, the oil crises, the collapse of the

Bretton Woods system, the European economic lobby and the will of the politicalintegration on the regional development. In 1975 was the establishment of the EuropeanRegional Development Fund. In 1984, The United Kingdom amounted to receive afinancial reimbursement because it did not receive a large amount of agricultural

subsidies, given the fact that the UK is an island nation and for them the industrial

development has been considered as a base.The agro- industry opposition as a cleavage was formulating here. The agriculturalsector receives substantial support, because the human resource requirements are

higher than the mechanized industry. The industrial sector cannot be subsidized as a

state intervention. At least, it should be strongly justified. Between the time of the EECTreaty and the Single European Act, the battle for having guidelines to the regional

development was leaded by the Commission. An important aim was that the support canbe encountering with a real investment approach to promote the development of

targeted areas. The relevance of the free movement of labour has been released. Themigration started from the poorer regions to the richer areas. One of its negative effectsis that the lack of human resources due to poverty leads to a reduction of the economical

potential in the area. The economy cannot develop without workforce or qualified

workforce. The Act 5 is addressed for economic and territorial cohesion. Article 130Adefines that the Community seeks to develop the less developed areas.Article 130B says that Member States shall coordinate their economic policies to achievethis aim. The Community ensure to achieve the aim by providing support. Article 130 C

states that the European Regional Development Fund is intended to decrease significantregional disparities as well as the conversion of declining industrial regions. This pointis important for the United Kingdom. The Article 130 D states the measures to achievethe aims. The Commission, the Council and the Parliament also play an important role to

realise the aims. The possibility of the reduction of the implementation unilateral of thenational interest is reduced.

13Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 14/12/2013


23/27

23

Maastricht Treaty

The new lan of the European integration had to be used. The cooperation in the

Community needed to be stronger than before. The Maastricht Treaty was the result ofthe will. The next enlargement with Austria, Finland and Sweden was not characterized

with big regional problems. The text of the Treaty was enlarged and the part of the

economic and territorial cohesion was displayed in the Title XV. The text reinforced theimportance of the reduction of the difference between the level of development, andurban areas are identified as development area (Article 130). Member States should

continue to coordinate the economic policies because of the realization of this aim. TheMaastricht Treaty states that it is important to take into account the regional

development objectives during the establishing process of the development of relevantEU policies (Article 130 B). This was a positive initiative because the EU took in hand thecontrol and the regional development are leaded by central plan rather than as a result

of national lobby. This decision has leaded the question on a more stable basis. Tomonitor the activity the Commission had to write a progress report every three years onthe achieved aims in the economic, social and territorial cohesion. Thus each MemberState can recognise what is spent and how it is utilized the content of the common

budget for this purpose. Possibly even good examples can be discussed during thedebate on this issue. In addition the establishment of the Cohesion Fund was decidedbefore 31th December of 1993. Its aim is closely tied to regional development asenvironmental awareness and the development of the Trans-European transport

network were essential for achieve the aims.

Amsterdam Treaty

In 1999 the EU was very close to the accession of the 10 new Member States. A crisis

situation was very close; the gate opening period stopped the creative lan. Even therewere no big changes in the regional policy; just the islands were put among the

developing areas (Article 130). Other substantive changes were not made.

Treaty of Nice

The EU was one year before of the Central European overture. The questions that were

not deeply treated and resolved in Amsterdam were the task to regulate in Nice. This

was a decision situation and the Member States didnt like to decide under pressure.They didnt like to transfer national interest and tools into European level. But beforethe accession of ten countries they had to create a functioning mechanism of the EUnearly doubled. There were not even two or three years to discuss. The preamble of the

contract is very important. The leaders of the Member States recalling of the historicalimportance the abolition of the division of the European continent decided to amendthe former Treaties. The Treaty gave the opportunity for enhanced cooperation, if this isgeared to achieving the EUs main objectives (Article 43). This can be an important area

for the Central European region as well if they decide, instead of political disputesagainst the neighbourhood, to cooperate and use the force of the common power to getmore support and strong economy in the region.


24/27

24

The Treaty of Lisbon

In the regional political issues the text of the Maastricht Treaty was not changed and was

transferred in the text of the Lisbon Treaty.

Current situation, determining goals for the future

Lets see what are the consequences to be drawn from the three different approaches.The three big countries, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom have country-specific

attitudes but they use their own attitudes systematically in similar situations. Francedoesnt continue inclusive policy towards immigrants. This doesnt mean automatically

to close the borders, but the attitude is present (see the Mediterranean Unions aim, orthe Schengen projects review14). There is no opportunity for the minority living inFrance to express the own identity and culture. The centralised uniformity does not

allow by the political elite to manage the problems and power lines existing in thepeople. France voted against the opening of the labour market in 200415. The nationallobby is very powerful, in a crisis situation France continue introvert and oftenprotectionist policy, sometime against the EU (position against the accession of the UK,

Luxembourg compromise (1966), the empty chair policy, opposition against the agrarian

reform).The political elite in the United Kingdom is closer to the people. The elite follow the willof the people. As a result, they can react to changes in time. They voted for the opening

of the labour market16. Currently the elites opinion is to regulate the freedom of the free

movement of workers. But the elite proposed this initiative in a very unfortunate andinappropriate political way. The result is a total political fire17. In addition, a study18hasconfirmed that the free movement of the workers didnt cause a big economical crisis

affirmed by the Prime Minister. The United Kingdoms attitude is a kind of the spirit of

the dealer. From the beginning the UK want an economical EU rather than a politicalunion.

Germanys policy shows repetitions as well. The country was divided more times duringthe history and Germany needed to find solution and planning to the reunification.

However it continues its politics to unify Europe, learning from previous mistakes. Asthe country is politically and economically well-organised, Germany moves slowlythrough compromise. In the case of the opening of the labour market the transition

14Nicolas Sarkozy says France has too many foreigners, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17280647,

date of consultation 15/01/201415

The accession treaty of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ciprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland,

Slovenia and Slovakia(2003), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/new_accession_treaties.htm, date of

consultation 09/01/201415France, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=10, date of consultation10/01/201416United Kingdom, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=14, date of

consultation 10/01/201417Schulz Cameronnak: az unis szabad munkaer-ramls nem jratrgyalhat,http://hvg.hu/vilag/20140112_Schulz_Cameronnak_az_unios_szabad_munkaer, date of consultation

13/01/2014, Andor Lszl: A sajnlatos brit vita, http://www.vg.hu/velemeny/publicisztika/andor-laszlo-a-sajnalatos-brit-vita-418132, date of consultation 29/12/201318Nicola Gilpin, Matthew Henty, Sara Lemos, Jonathan Portes and

Chris Bullen: The impact of free movement of workers from Central and Eastern Europe on the UK labourmarket, http://cream-migration.org/files/Working_paper_291.pdf, date of consultation 14/01/2014


25/27

25

period was maintained with a possibility to involve guest workers to the area suffering

from the lack of workers. Germany in the current context has great advantages over theother two countries. The country has learnt during its history the meaning of the

Western and Eastern ideology and the practice and consequences of the Europeanintegration. This experience can be a good advantage if it needs supporters among the

small countries. In Central Europe the player, who speaks the language, win. Germany

speaks this language.

The conclusions of regional politics

The Lisbon Treaty declares the need for the cooperation in the regional politics. The

Treaty defines the economic, social and territorial cohesion as a shared competence(Article 4, paragraph 2 c)). This means that to achieve the aim a two-way movement isnecessary. The Member States have to act at national and at European level. Ideally, the

country determines its aims and the development targets are based on this aims. Toachieve these aims the development of the regional competitiveness, the creation of newworking places, and the sustainable and balanced development of the rural / urbanenvironment is required19. But the situation is not ideal. For example the development

aims and the regional problems cannot be solved in the Mediterranean countries. Eventhe EU has monitoring procedures, this kind of the conservation of the problems, thepermanent unemployment situation in the less developed regions lead to political andeconomical crises both at national and European level too. The consequence is the

reinforcement of the right wing parties and the EU scepticism. If the EU has the will to

achieve the aims, as well as the unification of Europe, it needs to listen and understandthe voice of the people. The EU has to examine what programs function after the end ofthe grand period and compare to similar cases to learn what points are not correct in

different countries. The inadequate investigation of the problems and the lack of the

effective solutions have a negative impact on the regional development objectives.

How to capitalise on the advantages disadvantages?

The aim of the European Communities was rebuilding Europe, and this aim has notchanged during the modifications of the Treaties. To achieve the reunification of Europethe creation of a common market was determined as a basis. One of the problems is that

the economy of the Western European countries is highly dependent on the economies

of the USA. The unresolved standardisation, the regional policy challenges, the piling upof the tasks and the negative attitude on the free movement of workers weakens thedeepening of the integration. This process leads to negative political trends. In crisessituations the Member States dont establish common position, but they fight as

independent countries not members of the EU. But to finish the integration process andthe creation of the common market the Member States have to cooperate. If thefragmentation continues, the weight of the EU will be smaller than the US, Russia andChina. The EU has to decrease its dependence from the other economical entities but if

they are fighting against the freedom of the free movement of workers instead of thecreation of new workplaces, this aim will be not achieved. The common market cantfunction without human resources.

19http://www.touteleurope.eu/fr/actions/economie/aide-au-developpement-des-regions.html, date ofconsultation 13/01/2014


26/27

26

The free movement of the workers cant be limited, but within in a fruitful conversation

among Member States, it can be channelled regarding the interests. If in a given countrythere is a program in the regional policy, its method can be shared in a similar situation

of an other country. The sharing of the best practices exists but it seems only on papersnot in the practice. It is recommended to involve professionals who know, by experience,

the language and the way of thinking, the culture of the developing region. Knowledge

acquired in school will not replace the experience of years spent in the target area. In thedetermination of territorial specificities the repeated failures have to be examinedclearly. These failures inhibit the survival of the programs after the end of the grant

period. Economic cooperation between the countries of Central Europe should beencouraged, not only the dependence of the Western countries economy. The economic

cohesion entails political cohesion and reduces the region's instability. The EU's Balkanenlargement should be leaded by Central European countries. The countries have to beproactive; they dont want to wait for the request. They have the experience due to the

common history to make propositions, initiatives to determine the direction of theaccession. The common aims, the use of action together facilitate the cooperation andthe cooperation of the economic development. Maybe in the framework of enhancedcooperation this initiative can be realised.


27/27

References

1. Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf2. Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-

lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001

3. Lisbon Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML

4. The accession treaty of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ciprus, Latvia, Lithuania,Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia(2003), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/new_accession_treaties.htm

5. Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the internationalinstitutions and organizations, LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest,2006,

6. Une reconstruction conomique, http://www.histoiredumonde.net/Une-reconstruction-economique.html

7. Nicolas Sarkozy says France has too many foreigners,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17280647

8. France, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=109. United Kingdom,

http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=1410.Schulz Cameronnak: az unis szabad munkaer-ramls nem jratrgyalhat,

http://hvg.hu/vilag/20140112_Schulz_Cameronnak_az_unios_szabad_munkaer

11.Andor Lszl: A sajnlatos brit vita,http://www.vg.hu/velemeny/publicisztika/andor-laszlo-a-sajnalatos-brit-vita-418132

12.Nicola Gilpin, Matthew H

the role of the free movement of workers in the regional policy of the european union

Documents