Chapter on employment for new Maastricht treaty

THE draft text of a specific chapter on employment is being prepared for inclusion in the amended Maastricht Treaty. Mr Noel Dorr, the Tanaiste's personal representative in the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) negotiations, told a joint session of the European and Foreign Affairs Committees yesterday that the target date for the production of a draft review of the Treaty was "Dublin 2" - the summit which takes place on December 12th and 13th.

The IGC is currently reviewing the Maastricht Treaty and considering articles for a new treaty that will be called after the city where it is signed by the heads of member states. It began its work in March in Turin and expects to have a draft revision ready by December.

The new treaty will have to be ratified by parliaments and, in some cases, by referendums. According to Mr Dorr, the outcome "should make the Union more explicable and closer to a citizens' Europe".

Meanwhile, there is general agreement that employment is a very important issue and a strong belief exists among member states that a new chapter dealing specifically with the issue should be adopted as a treaty amendment. However, there are also some countries which oppose the idea, saying it would only serve to create "unrealistic expectations" about job creation.

Mr Dorr, who is also chairman of the IGC personal representative group, said they have drafted the text of a new section which would be called Title VIII on "Social Policy, Employment and Vocational Training". It consists of four chapters.

During discussions he had observed signs of agreement but employment was an issue "of high political character".

Senator Mick Lanigan of Fianna Fail said one of the "successes" of the EU was its ability to "create unemployment". Only the provision of State benefits had prevented the "huge social unrest that we could have had". There were no expectations among the unemployed that their situation would change.

Senator Brendan Daly said there must be "a strong message in the newly revised treaty about the EU's determination to fight unemployment.

The chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr Alan Dukes, said that, contrary to Senator Lanigan's assertions, there had been a host of EU measures to support employment and those seeking work. However, he asked Mr Dorr if the inclusion of the so called employment chapter was more cosmetic than real.

"Is it not just a kind of admission of defeat in the political presentation field rather than any degree of success in the employment field?" he asked.

Mr Dorr said they were not trying to put an employment policy in place but to put structures into the treaty on how the problem could be tackled.

Dealing with Europe's Common Foreign and Security Policy, he also told the joint session that France had the idea of appointing a political personality who would become the "face" of EU foreign policy on a three year basis. This person would not only articulate EU foreign policy but also work on it.

However, other member states feared that the creation of this task would "displace" the role of the Commission and the Presidency.

Mr Dukes said that if a coherent foreign policy was to be worked out, it must be within agreed structures, "rather than something grafted on half way up the vine".