Contemporary Social Policy in the E.U.
Professor John Wilton
Lecture 5a
Two case studies:
a) E.U. Welfare policy
b) Labour mobility and employment policy in the E.U

Lecture 5a
Additional source:
Diamond, P. and Lodge, G. European Welfare States after the Crisis. Changing public attitudes.
Policy Network paper at www.policy-network.net London, January 2013

Lecture 5a
1957 Treaty of Rome – no Member State should be at a competitive economic advantage or disadvantage
in ‘common market’ because  of its social provisions (social protection and welfare systems)
Article 117 introduced principle of harmonisation of social protection and welfare systems – but
only an ‘aim’, no laws or regulations

Lecture 5a
1957 Treaty of Rome put social protection and welfare provision on E.E.C. agenda
After 1985 – Delors ‘spillover’ neo-functionalist strategy – develops ‘Coherence’ approach –
enables him to get ‘Social Dimension’ on to E.C. policy agenda
1985 Single European Act confirmed move away from harmonisation towards mutual recognition of
national social protection and welfare systems

Lecture 5a
1985 Single European Act referred to “the harmonisation of conditions”, BUT stressed that
directives should be adopted setting out “minimum requirements for gradual implementation having
regard to the conditions and technical rules obtaining in each of the Member States” (on social
protection and welfare) (POLICY FORMULATION based on MUTUAL RECOGNITION)

Lecture 5a
1989 Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers – encouraged convergence of national
social protection and welfare policies on common objectives
- harmonisation retained in context of freedom of movement - harmonisation of:
- conditions of residence;
- of duration of paid leave;
- of health and safety conditions at workplace

Lecture 5a
BUT Charter ‘recognised national differences in social protection and welfare systems – referred to
“ need to act in accordance with national practices and arrangements applying in each Member State
(POLICY FORMULATION based on COHESION (of principles)
(MUTUAL RECOGNITION of diversity in POLICY IMPLEMENTATION)

Lecture 5a
Charter of Fundamental Social Rights of Workers appended to 1992 Maastricht Treaty as the Agreement
on Social Policy
-EU Commission’s role limited to encouraging co-operation between Member States and facilitating
co-ordination of action of Member States in all public policy/welfare policy covered by Agreement
on Social Policy

Lecture 5a
July 1992 E.U. Council of Ministers issued recommendation on ‘convergence of social protection
objectives and policies’
- was concerned that differences in social security cover might impede free movement of labour and
increase regional imbalances, particularly between north and south of E.U.
- proposed a convergence strategy that was flexible, progressive, but non-binding

Lecture 5a
Common objectives of convergence strategy based on:
- equal treatment and fairness;
- avoidance of discrimination and disadvantage.
BUT only broad aims and principles – no clarification of how principles should be operationalised
(POLICY IMPLEMENTATION based on harmonisation of principles rather than clear measures)

Lecture 5a
1997 E.U. Commission described highly developed social protection (and welfare) systems as a
‘fundamental component and distinguishing feature of the European Model of Society’
BUT welfare and social protection policy  formulation only subjected to limited harmonisation (of
objectives, aims and principles) AND greater mutual recognition of diversity in policy
implementation

Lecture 5a
Reasons for limited harmonisation (of principles and aims) and greater mutual recognition (in
implementation):
1.Enlargements (and introductions into membership of states with differing welfare and social
protection systems);
2.Differing stages of social and economic development of Member States (economic costs)
3.Differing societal cultural traditions

Lecture 5a
Implementation of Welfare policy across EU Member States last 25 years strongly influenced by:
1. Shifts towards market principles in provision of welfare – and introduction some privatisation
of services;
2. Economic pressures and political ideological choices by governments;
3. Introduction of managerial reforms;
4. Increased selectivity of citizens entitled to welfare

Lecture 5a
So, we have in EU:
    Types of welfare systems (Lecture 3)
influenced by
other factors over last 25 years
     (economic and political) (Lecture 2)
     and this has produced
greater convergence between harmonisation and mutual recognition (Lecture 4)
in welfare systems in EU states