The European Union should take into account the national realities of its member states and not resort to one-size-fits-all solutions for economic growth, Alfred Sant has insisted in the European Parliament.
The Labour MEP said the EU needs viable programmes that really compensate for the growing economic divergence between the centre and the periphery of the Union.
"Too often, EU programmes are evaluated by whether they contribute to a greater or lesser union. This focus is misplaced. We should be asking all the time how programmes will directly benefit citizens? which citizens? how? when? -- taking into account national realities -- avoiding one–size-fits-all solutions. With the right answers, asking whether we need more or less Europe could become irrelevant. There is no better way of generating growth in Europe," Dr Sant argued.
He was addressing the European Parliament on the ‘Decision adopted on the European Semester package – Annual Growth Survey 2016’.
On the issue of taxation for instance, the need for Europe-wide action should be restricted to the need for transparency, Dr Sant said.
Widening this approach to open the way for tax convergence and harmonisation is outside the present scope of the Treaties. It is also counter productive since it further limits the flexibility of regions and peripheral countries which most need it.
"So yes, to all measures intended to ensure transparency in the assessment of tax dues. But rather no, to measures that contribute to tax convergence and harmonisation."
The ‘Annual Growth Survey’ analyses the progress that the EU has made towards its long-term, strategic priorities. It sets out general economic priorities for the EU and provides Member States with policy guidance for the following year. The Annual Growth Survey is the first step in the European Semester and leads to country-specific policy recommendations made by the EU to governments.
Dr Sant will be the rapporteur on the second report on the implementation of the country specific recommendations. This report will be debated in September 2016 in ECON Committee and voted in October 2016 in the Plenary.