pesThis week, Debating Europe will be publishing interviews with some of the heads of the largest political parties and groups in the European Parliament. We’re especially interested to see how they differentiate themselves from rival parties when they respond to your comments. What alternative solutions do they each offer to the problems currently facing Europe? How is a “Social Democratic Europe” distinct from a “Liberal Europe” or a “Conservative Europe”?

We’ll begin with an interview with Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, former Prime Minister of Denmark and outgoing President of the Party of European Socialists, an umbrella political party made up of centre-left parties from across Europe.

On the face of it, Rasmussen’s party is facing its most serious crisis since the beginning of European integration. Since the recent elections in Spain toppled Prime Minister Zapatero, only 4 out of 27 heads of government in Europe belong to the centre-left. The Socialists also fared badly in the 2009 European elections, which saw the centre-right European People’s Party dominating. Not only that, but the very ideology of “Social Democracy” seems under threat in an age of austerity; earlier, Debating Europe looked at whether we can afford to keep the “European Social Model”, something seen as a crowning achievement of European Social Democracy.

So, how does Rasmussen differentiate his party from the rest? And what does he think about the debate we’ve been having on the “European Social Model”?

I feel that the Conservative majority of Europe have played a bad hand in the past 18 months. Take Greece… they were too hesitant and they were also non-European in the way they did it. What we need in the Eurozone is therefore true European mechanisms - as we have proposed – with a new economic and European financial facility which is truly European, so we avoid [a situation] where the markets can speculate whether this national parliament or that national parliament will really say “Yes, it’s okay to help Greece”.

Is there a problem with the Euro itself? We’ve had a fairly detailed discussion prompted by mike1966 about whether it might be time to abolish the Euro. On the other hand, we’ve had commenters arguing that the problem is caused by having a monetary union without an underlying fiscal union.

The problem is not that you have the Eurozone. The problem is not that you have a European central bank. The problem is that we don’t have an economic cooperation which is truly European and can keep the 27 countries together. That’s why we have proposed to develop a strong economic cooperation and to develop true European mechanisms to help those countries in difficulties – under fair conditionalities – but certainly also allowing that we’ll have growth again.

What about the question of “austerity” versus growth? This seems to be a question that challenges the very foundations of European Social Democracy. One of our commenters, Paul, argued that we should rather be seeing a “new Marshall plan” in Europe to spur economic growth. But can we afford not to make cuts in such a crisis?

The question is not about cutting or not cutting, or cutting more or cutting less. The question is: who caused this crisis? I think most of us agree today, from left to right, that the crisis did not come because governments were too big. The crisis came due to a financial market which grew out of control, and a financial bubble - the worst one we have had since the second world war. Believe me that, at the peak of the financial market, the transactions were accounting for more than 70% of the Earth’s gross national product.

What we need is a burden sharing for those that caused the crisis. That’s why I’m saying let’s begin to introduce a European Financial Transactions Tax (FTT). Not something at the global level, which we all know will take generations and generations if we’re lucky – there will always be a Bermuda or a Cayman Islands - but a true European tax which can function and will contribute in an effective way to ensure that it’s not only ordinary people who pay and it’s not only the public sector which pays, but it is truly the financial sector - who caused this crisis - who should pay. Look at the wage increases and bonus increases in the financial sector; I don’t see here a co-responsibility, and I don’t see a shared vision where we all have to contribute. I see greediness still. And without a financial transactions tax, they don’t have to pay.

We’ve also been discussing the need for a “paradigm shift” in Europe’s approach to economic growth. What does Rasmussen think about our current economic approach?

I think that, for too long, the shareholder aspect, the short-term, quarterly based exchange rate on the shares at the marketplace, has been the guide for evaluating competitiveness of firms and economies. We need to see a new paradigm based on stakeholders, where co-responsibility is playing a stronger role. If you take our new efforts, for instance, that Europe should now invest in green growth, that we should decouple the dependence between growth and energy consumption, that we should have energy-efficiency, that we should invest while we reduce the use of, for instance, nuclear energy and increase the use of wind-farms and off-shore energy; this demands an enormous amount of investment. Investments in that sector will take time before they give profits back. If this was all dependent on shareholder perspectives of a quarter, it would never be done - so we need to change our economic paradigm so we allow long-term investments in research, education and technology, thereby developing new jobs. We cannot compete [internationally] by lowering our salaries, but we can compete by increasing our knowledge and education and technology capacity. That’s what we need, and to do that we need to, in a sense, reintroduce the stakeholder perspective.

What do YOU think? Is European Social Democracy in crisis? Does the Party of European Socialists need to re-think its ideology in the face of the current crisis? Or was it rather a crisis of unrestrained capitalism that led us to where we are? Let us know your thoughts and opinions in the form below, and we’ll take them to policy-makers and experts for their reactions.

Vote 2014

Voting is closed in our Debating Europe Vote 2014! The results are now in, so come and see what our readers thought!


6 comments Post a commentComment


  1. Patrick Leneghan

    The Party of European Socialists exists in name only as far as I can see. There doesn’t appear to be any socialists or even social democrats among them. Anyone that supports this current globalization that is controlled by financial capitalism cannot be a social democrat or a socialist.

    Social Democracy works and will work within but separate to, this ruthless financial capitalist globalization. Basically, social democracy means an internal consumer society, meaning building infrastructure, housing etc to meet the needs of the people, manufacturing consumer goods, growing crops and livestock etc. again to meet the needs of the people with a modest profit in mind and abandoning this manipulated ideology of the globalized financial markets altogether. Any profits made from exports (outside Europe) should be seen as a bonus but not an absolute necessity. Ending usury is another must.

    Europe, including the Party of European Socialists have been conned into playing the financial capitalist’s game, a game where they, these financial capitalists have set/fixed the rules that guarantee that they win and guarantee that we lose. If Rasmussen was a socialist or even a social democrat he would know this.

    IF the Party of European Socialists and social democrats had stuck to their ideologies, they and we would be in a far better position today.

    Even now, in a minority, hardly a squeak out of them.

    They must get back to (and not from) their place in the political framework.

    Re: “I think most of us agree today, from left to right, that the crisis did not come because governments were too big. The crisis came due to a financial market which grew out of control”…

    Correct but added to that ‘was ALLOWED and SUPPORTED’ that financial market to grow out of control. In fact, this support continues, even today, the EU (EEAS) is down on bended knee to them.

    I do not think that financial markets *grew* out of control, I believe that financial markets *took* (sometimes violently) took control and nothing short of an assertive and upfront campaign to oust them from this control is required.

    An FTT is far too much of a wishy washy answer and probably a waste of time. Having experienced a country that had such taxes, all that happened there was that those taxes were passed onto the user/consumer.They even detailed them in customer statements in an effort to embarrass the government/political parties and it worked, those taxes became an election issue and were eventually abolished.

    There can be no doubt that there is a full scale economic war and well under way. In fact, by the look of it, that will evolve to a full scale military war, possibly in the near future.

    As such, opponents of this occupation by globalized financial capitalism should be upfront and undiplomatic when dealing with these issues.

    Upfront, undiplomatic and in their face is what a Party of European Socialists or any kind of socialists would have done. (when faced with the invasion of international financial capitalism) At least this would have given voters some choice, at the moment, I fear that the Party of European Socialists (and other supposed socialists) will have retarded that particular brand for some time to come unless, there is that change to their language and diplomacy. Get in there and fight I say!

    30/11/2011 Joseph Daul, Chairman of the EPP Group, has responded to this comment.

  2. Christos Mouzeviris

    Socialism in Europe is critically endangered….Like the Amur Leopards…very few remain in the wild.
    Haven’t you notice that most of Europe is “blue”, that means have right wing Governments? And the few that do have left/leftist Governments, follow right wing policies..No wonder the people are angry and vote for right wing parties…Because if they can’t find social security in the left wing parties then what is the point?

    Not to mention that far right wing parties are on the rise..Nationalism is on the rise..Because of irresponsible economic, social and immigration policies, the people want to return to what they knew best…A nation state!

    So was it all designed to happen like this? Or we are just hopeless? If Europeans vote for right wing Governments, then perhaps they are worthy of their fate, but then again what alternatives do they have, since the Left is also promoting and supporting aggressive Capitalism? Most of the times the vote right wing parties to get rid of the corrupt previous left wing Governments…

    So without knowing it, and out of desperation , anger, disappointment and a hope for a real change, they willingly give the permission to the Right to chop their salaries, scrap their worker’s rights that they have won over the decades and establish more Capitalism of the American style.. Has the Right infiltrated the Left and make it collapse from within? Where are we going with this?

    30/11/2011 Joseph Daul, Chairman of the EPP Group, has responded to this comment.

  3. Pablo Jarvis

    You can’t rethink an ideology, the age of the conservative vs social democrat (both neoliberal) bipartizan political systems is coming to it’s end.. the 21st century will be the dawn of the first real secular, progressive movements for social justice. A revolution of consciousness is on the horizon somewhere..

  4. Albert Saxén

    Like take it from my bk, example on healthcare
    “..either. The difference between social liberalism and socialism is the former gives room to market forces. But social democracy (socialism)
    has deep skepticism of capitalism and doesn’t believe public good can be achieved without changing the nature of the state itself.”

  5. David Wearing

    It seems to me that the genuine social democracies, i.e. those following the Nordic model, are the ones that have come through the current crisis having suffered the least pain. Countries like mine, the UK, where we were governed for 13 years by neoliberals pretending to be social democrats, have suffered far more, as income inequalities soar and the economies became dangerously exposed to big finance. We have a crisis now not just because the Euro as a currency project was either poorly executed or fundamentally misconceived altogether, but because the EU is a neoliberal institution, currently acting as the bankers’ baliff as far as Greece is concerned, for example. This crisis has underlined the absolute need, going forward, for the commanding heights of the economy to be under proper democratic control, for the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share in fiscal terms, and for policymakers to be forced to govern in the interests of the 99%, not the 1%.

    30/11/2011 Joseph Daul, Chairman of the EPP Group, has responded to this comment.

required
required Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

More debates from this series – Arguments for and against a financial transactions tax View all