Documents: The Battle for Europe
1)Tony Blair’s speech to the European Research Institute (Friday November 23rd 2001)
-Listening comprehension (global and detailed)
-Reading comprehension and oral production (transcript)
Eurosceptism 2001 – GB’s attitude is rather cautious and eurosceptic
Click here:
2)Panorama Documentary: The Battle for Europe, BBC 27th November 2005 (16 minutes)
-England vs. France – different approaches to Europe
Available online:
TIME / England / France2.04-2.33 / Intro / Lithuanian example of what is happening in Europe
2.33-3.09 / Intro:
Jack Straw + Blair vs. rest of Europe
to title: The Battle for Europe / “at loggerheads”
“war of words”
“two camps squaring up for a fight”
New East – fast-growing economy
Pro-reform
Embrace reform or face decline / Old West
Protect cherished traditions
“leading resistance”
3.10- 5.50 / Euro farmers / FOR change of CAP to reduce abuse, overproduction, waste =
$2 dollar a day cow – the myth that no longer exists
2003 reform of CAP. Same subsidies but no reward for overproduction.
Aim = self-sufficiency
e.g. sheep fleece: wool for clothes, fleece for loft insulation (thermo-fleece) Costs more but environmental-friendly, healthy, natural, environmental alternative (a different market)
Blair’s aim: produce things for a market rather than for subsidies.
GB and France are at loggerheads over weather 2003 CAP reform went far enough
5.50-6.30
6.30-7.04 / Lagarde
Straw / Jack Straw – Foreign Secretary
Pro-reforms, as necessary. Initial reforms were interim, not meant to be permanent.
Aim was reduction of cost of CAP to taxpayers, which has not been achieved by reform. Cost at 42billion for euro taxpayer per year. Reforms are a significant start, but only a start. / Christine Lagarde – French Trade Minister
Against – a gimmick, a slogan, fashionable to call for more reform and to have a scapegoat
The reform of the CAP has already been put into place
7.05-8.31 / Salts Mill example / In industry, you adapt or die:
Salts Mill, Bradford. Global wool trade – world changed – now monument to Britain’s lost industrial greatness, couldn’t compete with cheaper imports from all over world, by 1970s it was all over, victim to market globalisation, so reinvented itself.
e.g. reinvention of wool into hi-tech: sought new opportunities, such as satellite TV
If industry can re-invent itself, why not agriculture?
8.35-9.30 / TGV example / France gets largest share of CAP, and France resists reform, saying their model is superior
Trains are on time: reliable, comfortable, high quality, operates well
BUT in deficit, taxpayer bails it out year after year = France is living beyond its means, one of most subsidy driven economies in the developed world
9.30-10.47
10.48-11.20
11.21-11.37 / Pau – French agriculture and cheese / For French, CAP is not a lot of money, at £30 billion, 40% of EU budget, but less than 1% of what national gov’ts spend overall, and necessary to country’s identity.
Investment is worth it to prevent threat of globalisation to national identity.
Lagarde: Agriculture is not like any other industry:
- saves local regions and their identity
- cultural identity, what we enjoy is necessary
- strategic interest for country (production of food = self-sufficient)
- food security
Straw: French must understand that the world has changed and they must change with it
11.38-12.30
12.40-13.55
13.55-14.31
14.31-14.41
14.45-15.19
15.19-15.50 / Comparing conceptions
Different conceptions of what Europe should be / Dynamic
Left gov’t of UK preaching to the right, Blair wants them to undertake reforms
Question: Why, when their economies are so stagnant are these countries so resistant to change?
Straw: A high employment policy is necessary, rather than depriving people of jobs to have better protection for the few. / France with Germany…
Afraid of change:
- Mazamet, industry, derelict factories, couldn’t compete with developing nations, due to globalisation and also French labour laws – 35hrs = difficult to adapt, impossible to compete,
- high protection of employees, doesn’t create new jobs.
National insurance contributions are three or four times more than in GB
Lagarde: French employees are better protected, have more and better benefits (health, insurance, retirement, etc)consider the NHS, less competent, reliable and efficient, but has a price
16.12-18.09
18.20-
19.03-19.10 / Germany
Car City / Car City – Volkswagon
If you have a job you have:
-high employment protection
-good hours
-generous social benefits
-a new car, etc
11% unemployment, worse than France
28 hours / week
Germans are reluctant to reform a system that worked for so long
“Winds of change”
“everybody knows what has to be done but no-one wants to do it”
What needs to be done? Why don’t they want to do it?
20-54-22.03 / Straw / 50% of GB trade is with Europe, so its interest is in rising prosperity, employment and economies in France and Germany
Faced with globalisation, France is in proud defiance, Germany is full of angst
22.43-28.53 / Lithuania / Lithuania: past communism vs. new economy
Lithuanian film industry, a booming industry
Unemployment falling
Inflation low
Wages rising
Rapid privatisation: growth, not welfare is the priority, economy has doubled in a decade
28.53- 29.46 / Straw: France and Germany being held back by over-regulation / Lagarde: in a mature country it is easier to produce changes when you are hungry than when you are well-fed (28.53-29.21)
29.50- 38.08 / Finland:
The THIRD way / Mix of two approaches: the third way, the Nordic model
Social justice + good economy
Privatised and liberalised: internet and high technology
Achieved without slashing welfare benefits
High taxes (45%) but everyone is in favour. Everybody pays, but everyone benefits.
High spending = better health = more work = better education + renewed education, which is necessary in an increasingly information tech society.
39.13-39.40 / Lagarde: must agree on:
-direction
-what we have in common
-operating model
-budget
we can learn from everyone
39.55-40.28 / A Tale of Two Europes / Openness
A global market
Deregulation / Greater protection
At stake = the future of the continent and its place in the world
3)Text: Reactions to Panorama documentary
Subsidies, globalisation and agriculture + other points of view on the EU
The main reason why the Common Agricultural Policy needs to be reformed is that third world countries can only really compete with high-tech countries in agriculture. It causes suffering and death in Africa and elsewhere if we do not let third world economies compete on fair terms where they are competitive, but force them to open their markets in industrial goods and services. There is no strategic advantage to Europe in producing expensive food at home rather than buying cheap food from the third world. We can always spend our money protecting the countryside in other ways if we wish to.
Stephen Franklin, London
Alan Little's programme was very interesting. Britain should be a bit careful about lecturing France and Germany on economic management. Yes,there may be a need for some increased labour flexibility to help bring unemployment down but,equally,Britain could certainly benefit from having French or German standard trains and hospitals.
Tony Green, Alton, UK
I am still not entirely clear why should there be a "battle" between France and Britain about the regulation of the labour market. Is Tony Blair proposing EU-wide legislation to force the French to enact our labour laws? If he is, this means a more, not less, centralised Europe. And why on earth does Allan Little think that fewer subsidies mean fewer French cheeses? French cheeses are just the kind of high value, specialist products that would thrive in a genuinely free market - just look at the price Roquefort fetches in any UK supermarket.
Edward Hubbard, Derby
We need more programmes like this. At last, a clear view on things for the masses. Globalisation is here and now. The EU is too restrictive for Britain to remain a member for too much longer - we can and do trade with the world. Old Europe is in its death throws as a world entity - if it ever was. I look forward to a brave UK Prime Minister giving us the vote to leave the EU in the near future - it is obvious that we should as soon as possible.
Ian , Whitwick, England
4)Tony Blair’s speech to the European Parliament (23rd June 2005)
Comparison with 2001, much more dynamic, GB must play an active and leading role:
A political, social and economic model (2 aims, 4 ways of achieving)
Hear the speech and compare to the first one [Tony Blair’s speech to the European Research Institute (Friday November 23rd 2001)]
5)Evaluation: Analysis: Europe’s social model, by Kirsty Hughes
Compléments: