The role of the free movement of workers in the regional policy of the European Union in the light of the

French, German and British attitude

Agnes BALLA Expert in international relations Demokrator Foundation, Budapest 04/02/2014

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4 EU enlargement and the attitudes of the three big European countries, France, Germany and the United Kingdom .................................................................................................................... 4 The attitude of the United Kingdom, Germany and France..................................................... 5 Central Europes attitude ............................................................................................................... 8 Cleavages between East and West along the two ideologies .................................................. 8 Conflicts between East and West in the Cold war ..................................................................... 9 The enlargement of the European Communities .................................................................... 10 Cold-war and its consequences................................................................................................... 12 Crises and attitudes during the integration process .............................................................. 12 Brief overview of the development of the free movement of workers ................................... 17 Creation of the European Economic Community, Treaties of Rome ................................... 17 Single European Act ...................................................................................................................... 19 Maastricht Treaty .......................................................................................................................... 19 Treaty of Amsterdam .................................................................................................................... 20 Treaty of Nice ................................................................................................................................. 20 Treaty of Lisbon ............................................................................................................................. 21 Regional policy relevance ................................................................................................................ 21 Treaties of Rome, the creation of the European Economic Community ............................. 21 Single European Act ...................................................................................................................... 22 Maastricht Treaty .......................................................................................................................... 23 Amsterdam Treaty ........................................................................................................................ 23 Treaty of Nice ................................................................................................................................. 23 The Treaty of Lisbon ..................................................................................................................... 24 Current situation, determining goals for the future ................................................................... 24 The conclusions of regional politics .......................................................................................... 25 How to capitalise on the advantages disadvantages? ............................................................ 25 References........................................................................................................................................... 27

Abstract The analysis focalises on the current debate in the European Parliament and society, on respect for the fundamental right of free movement in the EU. The aim is to better understand the French, German and British attitude regarding the issue. What are the main facts behind the current economical crisis? Which are the similar or quite similar crises in the past? What is the consequence of the Cold War in the debates between Eastern Europe and Western Europe? What are the historical wounds in the society? It is important to see how France, Germany and the United Kingdom decide in the integration process. To understand their attitude it is necessary to know how their society was constructed before the creation of the EU. The other important element is to understand the Central European point of view. The Western society has no deep knowledge about this region and they dont comprehend why there are so many debates on political and social questions in the new Member States. Is this region the new cradle of rising nationalism? Or they want to know who they are? The comparison of the EU treaties helps to follow the attitude of the development of the free movement of workers and the regional policy. What are the moments when there is an overture to develop these issues and when is the period of obstacles to cut or decrease them? The current economical and social crisis needs to organise social debates on the future of the European integration and the next enlargement towards the Balkans and Eastern Europe. To achieve the aim the Member States have to be more open to each others history, social characteristics to act together in crisis situation too.

Introduction The actuality of the topic is the deliberation of the movement of workers from Romania and Bulgaria and the attitudes against this liberty. Romania and Bulgaria are members of the European Union since 2007, but this fact did not mean the possibility of the use of the free movement of workers. One part of the member states used the restrictions against the free movement of workers from Romania and Bulgaria. At the end of 2013 some articles were published against the realisation of this liberty1. The member states with negative attitudes justified their opinion with the current economical problems. They argued that the international crisis and the political tension linked with the economical problems will be more serious after the arrival of the workers from the newest Member States. It is important to examine the former attitude of the member states with the negative opinion, and the attitude of the Member States who had not negative opinion regarding the liberty of the free movement of workers. The examination of the point of view regarding the topic is discussed on the case of France, the United Kingdom and Germany. My hypothesis is that the free movement of workers facilitates the economical and political integration, the reduction of the difference of East and West, the reduction of the migration due to the economical misery, and it can help to make stronger the economy of the Member States. This essay determines first the attitude of the three leader Member States, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, than it shows the legal development of the free movement of workers in the EU treaties. The third part presents the relevance of the regional policy. It is important to present briefly the attitude of the Central European area too. The last part presents the actual questions and some relevance of the present and the future with concrete propositions. The topic is showed in three different approaches. These approaches treat the repetition of the attitudes which have to be changed before the next steps of the integration. EU enlargement and the attitudes of the three big European countries, France, Germany and the United Kingdom In this part I try to find the answer to the following question: if we leave the opposition Franco-German and the English intervention in this question, which are the other driving forces to influent the history of the EU? What characterise the attitudes of France, the UK and Germany regarding the immigrants? Lets examine the actual situation and the path leading to current situation.
1

Cameron: Free movement in EU needs to be less free, http://www.euractiv.com/uk-europe/cameronfree-movement-eu-needs-f-news-531982, date of consultation 21/12/213 Orange alert for eastern and central European workers, http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/newsbrief/4067161-orange-alert-eastern-and-central-european-workers, date of consultation17/12/2013 German conservatives stir up 'welfare tourism' row, http://euobserver.com/social/122339, date of consultation 17/12/2013

The Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty presents the aims of the EU.2 To achieve these aims it is important to act at local and European level. To choose the best solution and the level of acting it is important to examine thoroughly the expenses and the benefit of the decisions. The enlargement of the EU has expenses but it has benefits too. The situation resembles for the introduction of a new product into the market. Before the sale of the product the enterprise has to invest a remarkable capital to develop it. The principle of the investments of the EU into the enlargement functions in a same way. The investors determine the criteria, and the negotiation process of the accession treaty is a possibility, not an obligation for the country to be Member State later. This is an important fact, because in some cases the investors capital is interpreting as a gift. The accession negotiation and the signature of the treaty dont mean equality for the joining countries. The case of the free movement of workers is a good example to demonstrate it. The half century in the Soviet Union exerted a negative influence on the economical and political development of the Central European countries. The countries with developed market economy, who determined the democratic requirements, have no experience regarding this question. Otherwise the EU did not realise yet the aims which were fixed at the beginning of the European integration. The deadline for the realisation of these aims is postponed for a later date (EU 2020, EU 2050). A useful negotiating behaviour for the realisation of the important questions is not formed yet (during the negotiation of the EU budget the Member States practice a market strategy and the aim of the foundation of the EU has got lost). These aspects dont reflect the advantage deriving from the historical fact, the lack of the negative effect of the Soviet Union. I did research to understand the motivation of the Member State when there is a lot at stake. The political and economical movement of three big countries, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, determines the direction of the development of the EU. Their attitudes have repetitive items in their decision-making within the EU. Fundamental truth is that decisions made in the past determine the present and the decision make in the present influence strongly the future. This mechanism can be changed if the wrong decisionmaking practice will be changed, and the leaders find new solutions regarding present questions. Lets see the French, German and English standpoint regarding to the free movement of workers if we remove the Franco-German conflict and British distance policy. The attitude of the United Kingdom, Germany and France These three countries play a big role on the European stage. Small countries usually follow the policy of the big countries, but it doesnt mean the loosing of their policy to ignore their interests. The creation of the Benelux group is a great example to demonstrate what happens when some countries being on similar level of development but having various mentalities have to cooperate to achieve a goal. Belgium is a glaring example to show how francophone/Latin mentality and Germanophone mentality work
Lisbon Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML, date of consultation 5/01/ 2014
2

in the practice? With a lot of negotiations because this country is more famous for the centrifugal forces, not for the realisation of their motto: Unity makes strengths. The role of the King is still important to create the unity, but the EU has no King. Then what is element of unity in the EU?3 In France, the ruling elite perceives the will of the people correctly. The consolidation of the centralisation, the extension of the public administration, the warfare took away a lot of energy to follow social changes and to react to it in time. Before the Enlightenment the French nobility lived in a separate world from the people, they didnt notice the opposite movements taking place among the people. Louis XVI finished his carrier by this inattention. The next example is the period of the colonisation. The domestic indebtedness and having of a luxurious, expensive leader lifestyle which is insensitive for the domestic economical problems, and the heavy taxation of the people, which restrained a part of the available capital for investments, needed to have a solution at a certain point. The subjugation of African peoples and using their labour helped relatively to replenish the treasury. But the daily life, the wellbeing of the people living in the colonies was not important for the French leaders. They used a monoculture plan in the colonies, which obstructed the countries from the healthy development way. The disappearance of the balance had a heavy cost later. At a certain point keeping the colonies in the old way was not a good solution, but there was no good scenario to manage the situation. This was the antecedent of the independence. Of course, the freedom did not go easily, and France had to look for some reason to not lose the prestige. Actually there are a lot of immigrants in France, but there is no minority policy in the country, everybody is French. The question is that what is the driving force in the people covered by the artificial uniformity? The French attitude regarding the topic of the essay is that they dont let in new people for the labour market, and they voted for the transition period of closing for 7 years. But the French subsidiaries are present in the Central European area and they have profit from the entry of the new Member States to the EU. The United Kingdom is an island country. This fact has a consequence that the territorial limits imply the limits of the population. There is not enough space to build houses everywhere because they need to keep field to agriculture or to create the transport network. The advantage of the fact to be an island is that the country is less affected in war situation and they can construct the defence easier. The English colonial policy was more rational. The aim was to have goods to maintain the British Empire. The leaders paid attention to the will of the people in the colonies too, and the British island was really the cold head leader of the British colonial empire. That did not mean the kind treatment in every case, but the survival of the British Commonwealth is a good example to prove the British rationality. The attitude of the island is to create rational limits for the immigrants. They did not vote against the free movement of workers, but they
3 Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the international institutions and organizations, LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest, 2006, p. 123

indicated the political and economical problems before opening the labour market. This is the situation in the present too, but now the British political elite use a very unlucky method, because the EU citizens who dont live in UK cant be causes of the actual problems. Germany had no significant role in the first wave of the colonisation. The country was under unification. The unification of the provinces in such way that they could keep their relative independence demonstrates the attitude of the German planning and precision. For the reason of having no colonies they developed a Europe plan. The execution of the investments, developments, the market acquisition needed to be done in a way which did not indicate huge wave of migration because the country had a given capacity. That was a reason to ensure a relatively good standard of living in the areas of investment. The immigration was regulated by a precise determination of the number and the area for the migrants. Their working speed is hard and they require the precise work from a CEO as well as from a sweeper. The selection of the workers is easy, if they work hard they can stay, if not, they can go back to their country or look for another opportunity in another country. Their attitude is to be winner in long-term and stable way. They wage guest workers, but reasonably, keeping in mind the stable functioning of the country. The Marshall plan, after the World War II with the aim to buy a market4, exercised an interesting influence for the three countries. France and the United Kingdom had no seeking a financial source for investments. But the division of Germany had a different result than what was expected. The situation of the UK is different from France, because London was a money market centre and the language is the same as in USA. The way of thinking is quiet similar so the communication drawback was less than in France where the language and the way of thinking is very different. In the case of the UK the problem was that the former colony, the US had the leading role to determine the European history. Lets see the German case. The aim of the division and occupation was to prevent that the German economy will be too strong. There were only two problems with this plan, but they were indigestible. First aim was that Germany loses its economical strength. But keeping open a wound (to construct the Berlin wall) ever bear in mind the injustice. I dont want to explain who was right because the winners write the rules and Germany lost the war. The attitude of different countries has importance to examine the consequences in the present situation. The second problem was that the Germans had a plan for Europe and they realised it. There were other European dream too but they were not realised. If the German economy does collapse, than the European reconstruction will be hard. The US administration saw this problem and they changed the strategy.

Une reconstruction conomique, http://www.histoiredumonde.net/Une-reconstructioneconomique.html, date of consultation 06/01/2014

Central Europes attitude Lets look at a few of the joining countries. Most of them were under the Soviet Union. Cyprus and Malta were British mandate. They were free and had the self-determination a long time ago. They had no chance to have free economy and policy. One part of their force was use to maintain their history, culture, language identity. The foreign flag and foreign anthem were use to unify the people but in their home one part of the families kept the original identity. In fact, the Soviet melting pot project failed, but the freed peoples have learned to persevere and be faithful, work hard. But the healing of the wound caused by the First World War does not work. This is the current weakness in Central and Eastern Europe. But the presence of the self-consciousness can be the indicator of the common investments between the CEE countries instead of the insults of each other. Lets see where is the problem with the restriction of the free movement of workers or the lack of the unified social policy between Member States. If someone loses his job and he demand a State aid, he receives it for 3 month and then if he could not find a job he has to go back to his country. This is not a problem because the worker is looking for a job, not social benefit. We can classify the workers in two groups. One group consists of the workers with a carrier aim; the other contains the workers who leave the country because of the economical difficulties. Their attitudes are different. Workers belonging to the first group are not forced to choose, they have the chance to try different possibilities and then decide to stay or go back to the original country. But workers in the second group have to keep the job abroad, because their aim is to earn money, to send money to the family. The attitude is determined by the economical constraint. They dont want use social benefits. The official European statistics show that the number of the migrant from Central Europe is about 1% of the population. Cleavages between East and West along the two ideologies The two part of Europe were rebuilt by two different ideologies. The promotion of the American consumer society in the Western part, and the soviet collectivism in the Eastern part determined the construction of the economical structure. The US invested a huge capital into the European reconstruction and they expected to have a remarkable profit from this business. The reconstruction of the countries based largely on independent individuals who can and want to work independently, the US didnt need to invest in their training. The soviet system was also profit-oriented to realise the economical aims, but they didnt leave intuitive persons to live alone. In the Soviet camp the freedom of the independent ideology was not an aim. Ideologically the happiness of the individual was draw up, but it was never realised. Considering the impact of the freedom and the prosperity of the individual in the Western society has resulted and individualistic society. The social bonding strength as a base was not applied.

Countries with strong identities can assert national interest, but they cannot always put it into practice because of the impact of the individualism. The Soviets forced collectivisation had a double impact on society. Firstly, there was a layer of people who found the solution to have the cooperation with power in an economically successful way. The other group chose to keep the national identity against the soviet identity, risking not having a carrier and the economical security. Lets have a look to the French, German and English attitude regarding the European reconstruction. One of the key elements of the French attitude is the promotion of the French language and culture. The French linguistic logic is different from the English one. These two facts were the reason for the distance keeper attitude which did not help the integration process. The former German-French opposition was transformed into English-French debate. Of course France and the United Kingdom took care to restrain of the political empowerment of Germany. The British had no linguistic problems. But the American quick lifestyle was different to the English cold blood. The Americans found quickly new solutions, innovative ideas and they tested them in the practice and if it was necessary, they changed the strategy. This flexibility was not an English specific. Contrary they accepted hardly that the former disciple outgrew the former master. In the case of Germany there was a historical repetition. The country was divided again. This fact resulted the aim for the reunification in short term. This plan was not supported in Western circles. Politically the German interest was to take a position in favour of the European integration and keep the German identity at home. Conflicts between East and West in the Cold war Lets see what are the wounds in Central Europe received from the West during the Cold war, and which are forgotten in the fact of integration. The basis is that neither West nor East developed according to their own interests. The two superpowers confrontation resulted several conflicts. However, the integration process will ultimately suffer the consequences of that. In Hungary, the 1956 revolution and war of independence was a major event when we asked for help from the West. Poland has repeatedly experienced the breakdown, loss of independence. In the Soviet era, the Polish quest for independence manifested itself several times (the Poznan workers 'strike in 1956; the student revolution in 1967; workers' revolution in 1969; the establishment of the Solidarity movement in 1980). In the case of the Czech Republic events prior the Cold War determined the EU scepticism. The events like Munich treaty (1938) or the creation of Czechoslovakia (impeding the path of independent development of the two nations) resulted the lack of trust for West or for East. The case of Slovakia is the most instable. This country was independent during very short periods, but was part of other alliances of countries. The late nation building has a strong impact in the present history too.

The lack of the processing of the history not only caused injustices to the west, but also in the Central European region. These misunderstand escalated during the EU negotiations. The enlargement of the European Communities The first enlargement process was in 1973. Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom joined to the European Communities. The big movements were leading by France and Germany. At the start of the European Economical Community the UK decided to not be part. Then the UK formed his own economical cooperation, the EFTA. But the success of the EEC and the US investments enervated the British economical plans. The UK decided to join to the EEC. But the great rival, France has not given its consent so easily. After the Second World War, the Germans had remained politically in silence and paid attention to the economic reestablishment. The reason was not only the war period but also the fact that Germany was again in front of a reunification. France as a winner, forgetting the fact that alone would not have the chance to be free from its captivity, politically reached a dominant position. The English presence in this dance was not really necessary. General de Gaulle was significantly against the British joining, which strengthened the British restraining attitude. Shortly after joining they started to fight with the French. The casus belli was the agricultural policy. The United Kingdom paid contribution to support among others the common agricultural policy, but as this is an industrial country, they had not benefits for this policy. They werent in the European club at the beginning. Those who arrive later in the club have to adapt. But the British showed that they are strong in case of a business questions. The EEC was a business question. They won in the question of the rebate. Meanwhile, the Germans, keeping in mind the purpose of the union, built their country quietly, or relatively quietly. It is important to note that was a conflict between two national interests on the community table. The support for the agriculture is good for France; the rebate is good for the UK. Greece joined in the atmosphere of the oil crises and the national protectionism. The country is not noted for its economical and fiscal obedience but after the collapse of the dictatorship it was better to have them inside than outside. However, Spain and Portugal had to wait in the doorway until the Member States organised their internal conflicts, and considered to continue with the building of Europe. The German persistence and the end of the Soviet era in the history leaded to the unique enlargement, the German reunification. Since this point Germany had a very important priority: the realisation of the social and economical integration of the country. Meanwhile the EEC was transformed into EU, and three new Member States joined: Austria, Finland and Sweden. The new Member States had developed economy and stable society. With Austria the German spheres of interest has grown, but the Austrian internal events linked to the extreme rights policy in 2000 evoked bad memories. As Austria was Member State, it was no question to dragging the accession process. The three big countries have no special position on this fact. But the Austrian events
10

triggered a reaction. The new Member States domestic politics echoed across Europe. The political turning urging the national strengthening didnt favour the current situation of the minorities and didnt draw a positive message for the immigrants. The EU confronted a problem in-house, which was not typical situation. Although the German-French relation is not without problems, but the Austrian nationalist rhetoric, which had a connotation of the Second World War, shocked the Community tired of the national wrestling. Suddenly it was no evident what decision could be good, lock out a Member State or intervention of its internal policy? As every decision has a consequence, if the three big countries decide to lock out a country, they could find themselves in the same situation. Or if they make an intervention in the internal policy question, they give a possibility to other countries to do the same method. The attention to treatment of the open wounds got lost in the economical bargaining. Austria, which was in the periphery of the EU, had to solve more problems than the old Member States. They had to stop the migrants on the border, and it is not only a financial question. If with the EU opening a flow of migrants gets moving, that route is through Austria. But if someone doesnt want to continue the trip to West, he stays in this country and it changes the current national proportion. The situation was the same after the beating the Hungarian revolution in 1956. France, Germany and the UK seem to be able to forget the historical lesson. Austria was on the EU periphery close to the Soviet Union. The periphery usually is less preferred area to develop. This attitude is present in the European regional policy too. In 2004 ten new Member States arrived, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia. Among the joining countries there were two islands, Cyprus which is divided, Malta, which was British mandate. The Nordic group, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had economical problems, but the Russian presence was the real problem and this is the problem in the present situation too. There is Slovenia, which is a developed country. Hungary, Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia form the Visegrad group. The countries had to wait 14 years, after their independence, before joining the EU. This was a long period, because the countries expected Western Europes joy for the reunification. But the Western countries were careful, on one hand they learnt the lesson from the former joining periods but on the other hand they didnt realise the joining countries specifics. The offered joining package was created regarding the other countries problems. But the Central European countries had other problems to solve. They would like to find their identity after the 50 years of socialism and having one idea. Their national questions were attacked by the Western countries in the European platform. The strong identity is a good tool to create a strong society if it respects the differences of others. The Central European countries had to find their identity, rebuild the economy, learn the healthy self-determination and believe that if they set an aim, they can achieve without central instructions. In parallel of these tasks they had to learn thinking with Western brain. This conflict could be understood by Germany because of
11

the reunification of the Western and Eastern parts, which was not only a financial question. Cold-war and its consequences During the cold-war the two parts of Europe had the attitude of opposition. This evidence characterises the present political-economical atmosphere too. For the CentralEuropean countries it is difficult to follow the American-Western way of thinking. For the Western countries it is difficult to understand the refusal attitude of the CentralEuropean countries in the questions which is similar to centralisation, a planned economy or the controlling mechanism. Why they are so sensitive to determine themselves what to do and dont be attacked in certain rapport. But the CentralEuropean area has no long-term experience in understanding what does mean: negotiation on its merits, cooperation, planning common purposes, realisation of them. The rapports are not evidently the consequence of procedures, but to see how the plans are, what the realities are, what is good and what doesnt work. Very important fact is that the countries interests are determined by the specificities of the societies. The society of the Western Countries is rather individualist, the society of the Central European is rather communal but not in the sense of collectivism. Thats a reason why it is difficult to build the European melting-pot. If a country is more individualist, then keeping the common heritage, history, culture is a problem. If the country is more communal, then the individual has a problem with the creation of his own personal limits. Where is our place in the community and who we are individually? Where are the limits to respect? How can we understand the way of others if we didnt live the same experience? Crises and attitudes during the integration process 1. Crisis: The creation of the European communities France was defeated in the Second World War but with external help it was sitting at the winners table. The fact of losing the war was difficult to digest for a former leading country. Germany has lost the Second World War too, and its territory was divided, one part belonged to west, the other to east. But for the reconstruction of Europe the German help was needed. On one hand the German planning and execution were very important method for ensuring the necessary resources and the stable rhythm of the construction. The American capital expected that the former enemies negotiate and make a decision. The leaders of France and Germany had good attitudes to negotiate the European integration. The stabilisation of the long-term future was important for them. They didnt want all immediately. It is important to see who were the players and their background. Robert Schumann, the delegate of France, came from Lotharingia. Schumann experienced in his life the differences and the similarities between French and German identity. He spoke German too, which was very important to better understand the German way of thinking.
12

Konrad Adenauer was for finding the French-German common points too. In his life there was an important moment which had determined his attitude having the ambition to create the peace and the rational cooperation. As a German citizen he was arrested by the Gestapo. This trauma helped him to understand that the German economy and policy had to be rebuilt in a way which helped to reconstruct the country but avoid the war. Jean Monnet was a trader, and during his activity he acquired a vast international experience. Among others he learnt the American negotiation and investing method. As a trader he learnt when it is necessary to come to the front and when it is better to draw back. He applied perfectly this knowledge when his collateral work with Schumann got into the history as Schumann-plan. Their common attitude was to be a strong patriot and they decided to use it for the construction of Europe and not conserving the fragmentation after the war. 2. Crisis: the British point of view The United Kingdom didnt want a narrow European alliance. They aim was rebuilding the common market, in according with the British negotiation method. For the British negotiators it was difficult to discuss and seating on the same level with their former war enemies at the negotiating table. But as they needed commercial partners, they established an alternative plan, the foundation of the European Free Trade Association. They needed to prove their leadership in Europe after the strengthening of US. Dont forget that in this historical period the colonies were still present. 3. Crisis: The movement of freedom of the colonies France and the United Kingdom were touched sensitively; they lost their great power status. A country needs to demonstrate that it is successful. The rich man buy car for this reason and the countries try to expand their territory. For France this was the second trauma after the fact that they had to cooperate with Germany. For the United Kingdom losing their colonies was the trauma as well as the lost of the role of the leader. After this period it was hard to keep in mind the importance for the cooperation with the Germans. Germany has lost the war but won Europe? 4. Crisis: The adhesion of the UK in 1971 If you do not join into the club when you are invited, you not only have to adapt to the rules made without you, but maybe you cant get in. De Gaulle taught this lesson with the two refusals of the British demand of joining. This fact increased the British Euro scepticism. But it is difficult to build a goal if the player doesnt want it. In international context we are two years before the first oil crisis. The European Community was cracked by these reasons. The consequence of the oil crises was the slowdown of the flow of the American capital to Europe. Europe had to pay the cost time of the internal fight, which had to be used for the construction.

13

5. Crisis: Oil crises (1973, 1979), the collapse of the Bretton Woods system The world economy was under collapse. The Americans risked a lot and they almost lost everything. The consequence of the oil crises was the shortage of raw materials. They had to pay much more to one barrel of oil, and one part of capital to investments was transferred into net expenses. The oil as energy source was reduced on the market, and this fact broke the dynamism of the economy. Behind the dollar there was not enough gold stock to ensure its value. The Europeans, because they didnt build a strong economy by using the American capital based the available sources, become paralysed. The US was able to react quickly and it kept its supremacy. The European leaders didnt wake up to build the stable European market. They started to lead protectionist policy. There is no balance between the national building and the European construction. They didnt learn this method of unification from the US. The standards, the telecommunication, the transport network were unified in the US as the base of the internal market. In Europe for these questions have no answers, and the countries lead protectionist policy which has a negative attitude for the enlargement process too. The distrust of the countries causes more damage than the economical crises. If they dont believe in the European dream, they cant realise it. Keep in mind the attitude of the distrust; it will appear during the enlargement process later. 6. Crisis: Enlargement with Greece, Spain and Portugal These three countries have a common historical fact, they were liberated under dictatorship. But the dictatorships have no success in society- and economy-building. One of the most characteristic is that the political elite is far from the people, it isnt sensitive to the willing and movement of the people. From this fact they ended by a consequence of an initiative coming from below. The takeover was done, but problems of the development caused by the dictatorship needed to be treated. Greece came into the EC in 1981, but Spain and Portugal had to wait before the door because of the ECs internal problems. France had a problem, to not to be agricultural hegemony because Spain and Portugal were agricultural countries. France had to share the agricultural financial sources. Besides this fact the flow of the workers started from the poor countries to the old Member States. Keep in mind that there was a big unemployment rate in the old Member States too. The refusal attitude came to the front in the old Member States too. The lesson, which was learnt too late, was that the end of a dictatorship was good but its better to stabilise a country before inviting it to join into the EC. This lesson was later applied during the negotiations with the Central-European countries. 7. Crisis: the case of Austria Austria joined in 1995 to the EC with a stable political, social and economical situation. It seemed to be a quite period in the EU for the construction without internal crisis. But the Western countries, forgetting the repetition of the history, experienced with surprise the events of Austria in 2000. They needed to react, quickly, which is not the strengths of
14

these countries. If they exclude Austria, they become excluded. If they invent in the internal policy of Austria, they make possible the same intervention against their decision too. And the exclusion of a Member State is the confession that they were not able to prepare well the adhesion procedure and documents, the country rapport showing the real situation. The mistakes of the past will be paid by new candidate countries instead of the reparation of the preparation periods process. The preparation of the next crisis started. 8. Crisis: the collapse of the Soviet Union, the liberation of Central-Europe. The end of the Soviet Union meant the end of one moving power of the European integration, the big enemy. Its nature was known by the US and Germany. Better by the US, because the two big entities did not exist independently of each other, they tested their force in the third world (cf Vietnam War, Korean War). Europe was late to influence the history because the conflict of the MS took too much force to build Europe and set the aim of the cohesion and the power rising from the tensions will be transformed to the force of the creation. The Central European area indicated the will of the joining and becoming part of the European integration. They were numerous, poor, fragmented economically and socially. The fatigue was present in the societies, the bitterness of the practical experience that if they wanted to develop then they were blocked economically and sometimes by the foreign army. But they believed that at this point their aim was the reality. The adhesion procedure started, but they had to pay the price of the mistakes of the former adhesion period. They had to find quickly their own identity, aims, place in the big common camp, the relation from east and west, the economical consolidation, to forgot the Soviet teaching, to understand the Western teaching. The capital, the goods and the services came into the CEE but the free movement of workers was very limited for the Western part of Europe. Austria and Germany permitted in some sectors to the CEE workers to work but this was good first of all for the economy of this countries. France was against to open its labour market. Its aim was to find a solution for the people coming from the former French colonies. The UK was not against the opening the labour market but it created rational economical limits. The small interference of the most sensitive freedom resulted the attitude against the EU. In sharp economical situation the Member States closed the gates and forgot the common aim. In the Central European countries economical problems dont cause difficulties; they had the experience of having two jobs for a relative normal life and working in the garden if the salary was not enough for buying food, etc. But the ignorance and the indifference of the democratic western countries was a shock to this area. 9. Crisis: the present situation The EU is before important changes. Since present time there is no realised aim, no common internal market, and no equality in the practice for the European citizens, no unified Europe. This is a basic competition disadvantage in opposition of the US. The US, which realised its aims to have an internal market, is able to react quickly and stable. But
15

the EU conserved the cleavages and in a case of a sudden movement the system can fail. But now the EU has no time to thinking a lot before acting. The aims, which were neglected to achieve, have to be realised parallel and quickly. The lesson from the past has to be understood and new attitudes have to apply. The tension among nations has to be treated. The EU has to go back to the roots and treat the situation as a whole, not focalise only partial questions and lost in the details. Finding solutions of these partial questions dont resolve the problem of the misunderstanding. Instead of determining new aims the EU has to resolve the initial aims. The answer has to be found from the question: are these aims important now? If yes, where are the critical points of their realization? What are the causes and how to go on? The sober communication of the two part of Europe is very necessary on equal basis. The treatment of the former crises as showed by Helmut Kohl and Francois Mitterrand in 1984 could be very helpful. Their behaviour showed that wounds are healing up slowly and they needed to ensure each other for the will of the cooperation for achieve the real, deep alliance. The solution done for the Second World War resulted more damage than it is evident at the moment. The Central European region is also prone in the crisis turning inwards, and that overstates the strength. In the Member States it is very important to choose vital political leaders who, like the German - French co-operation, go to the negotiating table and are serious about reconciliation. This would free up forces to settle the common experience, and on this base a common Central European development can be built. It is not enough to receive EU funds to the development, but development in the Central European region is important between the countries. If countries build cooperation among them, the Central European economic situation will be stable. Economic settlement of the German and French opposition finally get his way on the two countries to coordinate often and they do not seek a treatment like the possibility of war in the conflict. The EU will not give meaningful answers in political and social point of view to the Central European problems. It is the responsibility of the Central European states. It is necessary to finish the displays of the problems on the European scene. The economical interests will use these fault lines to take advantage for them. On the single market the competition is not unforgettable. The specificities of the European Union are to create economic competition out of doors and in-house. The EU has a specific formation, this is in the constantly change of its extent, population, economic weight. This is not typical in the case of the competitors. Russia, China, Japan and the US have no many variables, so their strength can be given to economic competition rather than the EU. Now with the opening for the Balkans the EU is facing an important decision. The situation is much more sensitive than in previous accessions. In the Balkans China, Russia, US, Arab states are present and the EU a bit as well. The Balkans is a part of Europe, but it is a particular word with a lot of wounds. There was not enough time to heal them. There is an artificial peace in this area without understanding the history and the specificities of these countries. The EU has already committed some serious errors (Bosnia - Herzegovina conflict, the Kosovo issue, the issue of treatment of war criminals), so it will be difficult to convince countries that they want them to join to the EU. The EU's aim is to unite Europe. To realise this aim, the knowledge and the experience of the Central European countries are important. They know the meaning of an artificial multi-national state formation, and how hard it is to find the own identity again after the collapse of it in the continued presence and
16

influence of the big countries. If the Balkans will not be part of European Union, then the initial aim will be not realised. Brief overview of the development of the free movement of workers This part of the research focalise on the main problem is how were the four freedoms created, what kind of importance was attached to the free movement of the workers in the founding treaties. Building the foundation of the European Community began to create the four freedoms. The four freedoms are the free movement of goods, capital, services and free movement of labour. In short it is useful to have a look of their nature. In the case of goods we can conclude that the workforce plays a significant role in the production. In the case of capital we can conclude that a part of it comes from the sale of goods, which is closely linked to labour practices. In the case of the service is clear again that it cannot be realised without the involvement of the workforce. The labour force needs to be part in the productivity of one of the three liberties listed above. However no one of the three freedoms can be achieved without labour, the labour force has the liberty to choose with what freedom it will be unfolding. From this fact we can draw the consequences that restrictions on the free movement of labour in the EU is the obstacle of the development. The study is based on regulating the establishment of the EEC Treaty of Rome. Than it examine the relevant part of the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Nice Treaty, and finally the chapters of the Lisbon Treaty. Creation of the European Economic Community, Treaties of Rome In 1957, a contract was signed, which laid down the principles of establishing a common market. The engine for the development was the creation of the four freedoms. The four freedoms are free movement of persons, goods, services and capital flows. We are after the Second World War, the period of the reconstruction of the Western part of Europe. Among the four freedoms the capital is the less available and the labour force is the most available. The capital flows from the U.S. to Western Europe under the Marshall program. The U.S. induced investment by capital in the region. The nature of the capital is that it flows to the place where it can be multiplied within the framework of investment. The US, by the capital investments, determined significantly the direction of the development, the attitude of the consumer society. Significant power was invested in the promotion of the American way of life. The impact of the war affected also the peoples attitude, it was very attractive for them to get a job, receive income and they had chance to control their lives and the uncertainty was reduced (in the war there were several elements of uncertainty, for example a bomb slamming into the building and a lost of house which was before a kind of stability). The Article 3c) of the EEC Treaty speaks first about the movement of persons. It states that to achieve the aims of the Treaty the abolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons, services and capital5 is important; The Article 5 provides that Member States shall take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of this Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the Community. They shall facilitate the achievement of the Communitys tasks. They shall abstain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objections
5

http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 15/01/2014

17

of this Treaty6. The Article 7 disposes the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality, but this fact can be maintained under certain conditions. It is important because the sensibility of the freedom of the workers is the biggest among the other freedoms. In the other case the sensibility factor is not so big. The good is sensitive also, especially not durable goods. The service is also sensitive, as it depends on the market demand. The capital is also sensitive, as it seeks to place at relatively low risk to achieve a profit growth. But these sensitivities move on one axis, they can be calculated from the trends of reduction or growth. In contrast, the sensitivity of the employee is more complexes. The same working conditions and the same wages do not make the same effectiveness in the productivity of workers. The quality of life and social embeddedness can significantly affect the efficiency of the productivity. The Treaty and its implementation were a success story till the 70s. But then the U.S. oil dependence and the outbreak of the crisis had significant impact on the Western European countries and the EEC was well. Protectionist measures have been taken in the EEC countries. The capital has not flow as before and the labour forces had a surplusage, the unemployment rate augmented. The German - French cooperation and co- thinking also slowed. The period from 1957 to 1979 to establish a stable market was not enough for the Western European economy and in crisis situation the protectionism was reinforce not the community way of thinking. Among the non -tariff barriers the lack of the uniformity of the professional qualifications was highlighted and the restrictions on the free movement of labour. Merely the decision that a country adopts a decision that cannot receive workforce doesnt lead into a crisis but in Europe the former warring parties blocked each other, and it amplified sensitivity. The protectionism was a very negative impact to the European dreams realisation. The increasing economic difficulties as well as the national attitude of opposition leaded to the intensification of extremist political tendencies. The discharge of the voltage resulted in world war minimally in two cases. One of the most prominent fighters of the unification of Europe was Jacques Delors, who was working to give the right direction to the energy issuing the tensions between Member States to transform them into the energy of the creation. One of the results of this huge work was the birth of the Single European Act in 1987. At this point we are close to the breakdown of the Soviet Union where the change of the capacity was slower than the will of the people and as a result, the imperial system collapsed. Western Europe was characterised in 1980 by a massive unemployment rate. The post-war economy was not strong enough for mass employment, and the lack of capital prevented the creation of jobs. Luxembourg compromise proposed by the French (1966) has hindered the important issues of cooperation between Member States, to thinking in Europe, not preferring the realization of national interests. To the creation of the big marker the majority voting has been introduced7. The importance of the four freedoms of movement and freedom of movement of persons was confirmed. Meanwhile three countries have joined the community. But in these countries the economy and the political system were not really stable. It was expected intensification of the movement of the workers towards the more developed western countries but they needed also strengthening of their own economies. The economical actors leaded an intensive lobby and they established the European Round Table of Industrialists in 1983 to achieve their aims. They wanted to reduce the capital dependence from the US and to reinforce their
http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 15/01/2014 Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the international institutions and organizations, LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest, 2006, p. 130
7 6

18

role in the market. Do not forget that at this time there was a relative lack of capital and oversupply of labour. The three new Member States (Greece, Spain and Portugal) were sensitive in economic term and they didnt participate in the economic development since 1957. The workforce coming from these countries was increasingly sensitive to the negative behaviour of wealthier countries. Single European Act The second chapter of the Act provides for an amendment to the EEC Treaty (Article 13). The Article 13 confirms the importance of the internal market and the four freedoms as its base. In order to facilitate the functioning of the internal market several cases have been expanding in which the Council decides by qualified majority. Measures relating to the free movement of persons and workers' rights and interests remained in the measure requiring a unanimous decision. The Article 100 of the EEC Treaty was completed a with the proviso that the Member State has the right to turn to the Commission in the case if it states that measures in the Treaty contained an adverse impact on their inner workings. One of the examples is including arrangements for the protection of its labour market (Article 100, paragraph 4). It is concluded that the importance of the four freedoms is present but the distrust of foreign workers is present as well and there is no suggestions to transform one part of the labour force to realise a framework of development to complete the better application of the freedom of workers. Let's see what kind of progress we see in Maastricht. Maastricht Treaty The initial paralysis in the 80s and the industrial and political lobby gave wings to the development of the EU. The EEC was transformed into European Union, thus indicating that the integration into a higher stage. At the national level, this was the period of economic opening time and the privatisation wave. The functioning of the internal market was improved. The economic growth improved the quantity of the labour force and entailed the quality of the work. But the EU and the Member States had to change their attitudes to maintain the developing period. The EU has to be closer to the EU citizens. The Maastricht Treaty founded the concept of EU citizenship. Union citizenship does not replace national citizenship but complete it. The aim of the attractive gesture was expected that the person meet with less rejection than in previous years. Respect for people and workers can have a positive impact on achievement of the objectives set out in the preamble, such as in the context of strengthened social cohesion and economic development, and economic integration. The Article 2 of the first title outlines the objectives of the union which includes "the promotion of a high level of employment8" to, strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of nationals of Member States through the introduction of a citizenship of the Union9", "the free movement of persons10 in. The Article 6 paragraph 1 is also noteworthy. It states that "(1) The Union is founded on freedom, democracy, the rule of
Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of consultation 08/01/2014 9 Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of consultation 08/01/2014 10 Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of consultation 08/01/2014
8

19

law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, principles which are common to the Member States11. The common currency, the euro, which has a positive impact on the economy, has born. The common economic and monetary union can have a positive impact on the free movement of labour. The investors can easier compare the costs of the labour in the same currency. The common currency can decrease also the long-term investment risk. The so-called Maastricht criteria are also designed to ensure the stability of national economies and uniform comparative basis. The strengthening of national economies and maintain them at a sustainable level is good for the EU. On one hand the common budget cannot be spend to rescue-package. On the other hand with strong national economies the migration of the labour force due the economical misery can be decreased. The migration due to the personal development can be increased, and the qualified workforce increases the economical level at European level as well. The Treaty states that it is necessary to ensure the four freedoms of the internal market (Part I, Common Provisions, Article 3, c). It also states that internal measures are necessary to ensure the entry of persons into the internal market. Measures for employees have been retained unchanged the wording of the treaty of Rome (Title III, Chapter 1, Article 48-51.). Treaty of Amsterdam The next important step is the Amsterdam Treaty, which entered into force in 1999. Meanwhile, in 1995, three countries, Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the EU. These countries had good economic performances and they balanced the effect of the difficulties of the previous three accession countries. The European map has drawn on over 10 years after the collapse of the Soviet empire. The Central European countries, becoming independent, organically joined into the western economy. During the preaccession programs development funds came into the area, not given as a gift, but to influence the way of the development of these countries. The aim of the migration of the workforce is mostly Germany, Austria and the UK. The Western countries expected a huge wave of migration from Central Europe after the accession, but finally it has never came true. The EU needs to strengthen economically and politically the Central European region. Not only to avoid the migration of the workforce but to continue the expansion for the Balkans and Eastern Europe. To strengthening Europe the Member States have to harmonise their labour policies (Employment chapter, Article 109n109s). Just a few years separates the greatest enlargement of the Union, which certainly seemed to be a bold step. But before that the Nice Treaty has been born. Treaty of Nice Austria in the 2000s was famous. The domestic politics of the young Member State had a great echo across Europe. The country at the border in the former Soviet empire met first the mass migration phenomenon the 1956 revolution and freedom. The next occasion was the opening of the border due to the Pan-European Picnic, when the East German citizens en masse crossed the Austrian border. However, the third time he did not want to relive the same experience. Given the fact that Austria was Member State needed to find a way to thinking together. In Nice to strengthen the community
Maastricht Treaty, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001, date of consultation 08/01/2014
11

20

collaboration was a very important question. For the Central European countries this kind of reactions against the enlargement was a huge slap in the face. Especially because in Western Europe the people could travel freely between countries, whereas it was not so easy in the Soviet Union. If on the verge of joining the attitude against the citizens from Central Europe was so violent, the countries cannot expected the respect for human rights, the freedom of speech in practice and it can be a negative impact on the attitude of the people. It is important to keep in mind that only 10 years have passed since the democratic transition. The Central European countries did not really have a chance to find their own way. The Central European countries had no time to find their place in the world, to reliving their history and rich culture. The leaders of the preenlargement countries had no experience of the life in a closed camp. The historical influences deeply ingrain in people's memory and the Treaty of European Union accession negotiation cannot be called just two equal semi- bargaining process. The Member States during the Nice Treaty procession have lost a part of their independence, but finally they realised it. The line will eventually close by the Lisbon Treaty. Treaty of Lisbon The treaty entered into force in 2009. TFEU, concerning the workers noted only one change in the Article 48 (previous 42), which one Member of the Council provides that a measure will affect important aspects of its social security system of given Member State, it has the option to indicate this fact. In terms of employment there are no substantial changes in the provisions. Regional policy relevance In this section, I analyse the usefulness of free movement in the light of regional policy and ask what the positive and negative effects are. The presentation will lead you through the change in the EU treaties. Treaties of Rome, the creation of the European Economic Community The importance of regional differences has appeared in the Treaty of Rome. The founding countries formulated to reduce the importance of regional differences. In this achievement the four basic freedoms (capital, labour, goods and services) play an important role. The problem of regional disparities accompanies the European integration. The founding countries, in Paris in 1972, made a decision to extend financial tools to eliminate the regional and structural differences. They established the European Bank to provide funds for development. The preamble to the EC Treaty states: Anxious to strengthen the unity of their economies and to ensure their harmonious development by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and the backwardness of the less favoured regions...have decided to create a European Economic Community12". The purpose of the founding countries was the unification of Europe. This is confirmed in the preamble of the subsequent contracts. So we can conclude that the goal has not changed. This will be really important later. The Article 2 says:
12

Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 14/12/2013

21

The Community shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and progressively approximating the economic policies of Member States, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, and increase in stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between the States belonging to it.13 More sophisticated approaches are not included in the contract. The peripheral areas within the country and also within the realms were under-represented, which not means simply economic differences, but the difference in the society was dominant as well. The fact, that the interests of the people living there are not as important as the other part of country, started two types of process. On the one hand the discontent arising from the neglect feeling, on the other hand that, if there is no support from the centre than citizens should be able to develop their own initiatives. If the powerful aspect will be stronger than the negative aspect, a growth path can be realised which is based on the local situation. Single European Act Lets see what was the impact of the Euro sclerosis, the oil crises, the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, the European economic lobby and the will of the political integration on the regional development. In 1975 was the establishment of the European Regional Development Fund. In 1984, The United Kingdom amounted to receive a financial reimbursement because it did not receive a large amount of agricultural subsidies, given the fact that the UK is an island nation and for them the industrial development has been considered as a base. The agro- industry opposition as a cleavage was formulating here. The agricultural sector receives substantial support, because the human resource requirements are higher than the mechanized industry. The industrial sector cannot be subsidized as a state intervention. At least, it should be strongly justified. Between the time of the EEC Treaty and the Single European Act, the battle for having guidelines to the regional development was leaded by the Commission. An important aim was that the support can be encountering with a real investment approach to promote the development of targeted areas. The relevance of the free movement of labour has been released. The migration started from the poorer regions to the richer areas. One of its negative effects is that the lack of human resources due to poverty leads to a reduction of the economical potential in the area. The economy cannot develop without workforce or qualified workforce. The Act 5 is addressed for economic and territorial cohesion. Article 130A defines that the Community seeks to develop the less developed areas. Article 130B says that Member States shall coordinate their economic policies to achieve this aim. The Community ensure to achieve the aim by providing support. Article 130 C states that the European Regional Development Fund is intended to decrease significant regional disparities as well as the conversion of declining industrial regions. This point is important for the United Kingdom. The Article 130 D states the measures to achieve the aims. The Commission, the Council and the Parliament also play an important role to realise the aims. The possibility of the reduction of the implementation unilateral of the national interest is reduced.

13

Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf, date of consultation 14/12/2013

22

Maastricht Treaty The new lan of the European integration had to be used. The cooperation in the Community needed to be stronger than before. The Maastricht Treaty was the result of the will. The next enlargement with Austria, Finland and Sweden was not characterized with big regional problems. The text of the Treaty was enlarged and the part of the economic and territorial cohesion was displayed in the Title XV. The text reinforced the importance of the reduction of the difference between the level of development, and urban areas are identified as development area (Article 130). Member States should continue to coordinate the economic policies because of the realization of this aim. The Maastricht Treaty states that it is important to take into account the regional development objectives during the establishing process of the development of relevant EU policies (Article 130 B). This was a positive initiative because the EU took in hand the control and the regional development are leaded by central plan rather than as a result of national lobby. This decision has leaded the question on a more stable basis. To monitor the activity the Commission had to write a progress report every three years on the achieved aims in the economic, social and territorial cohesion. Thus each Member State can recognise what is spent and how it is utilized the content of the common budget for this purpose. Possibly even good examples can be discussed during the debate on this issue. In addition the establishment of the Cohesion Fund was decided before 31th December of 1993. Its aim is closely tied to regional development as environmental awareness and the development of the Trans-European transport network were essential for achieve the aims. Amsterdam Treaty In 1999 the EU was very close to the accession of the 10 new Member States. A crisis situation was very close; the gate opening period stopped the creative lan. Even there were no big changes in the regional policy; just the islands were put among the developing areas (Article 130). Other substantive changes were not made. Treaty of Nice The EU was one year before of the Central European overture. The questions that were not deeply treated and resolved in Amsterdam were the task to regulate in Nice. This was a decision situation and the Member States didnt like to decide under pressure. They didnt like to transfer national interest and tools into European level. But before the accession of ten countries they had to create a functioning mechanism of the EU nearly doubled. There were not even two or three years to discuss. The preamble of the contract is very important. The leaders of the Member States recalling of the historical importance the abolition of the division of the European continent decided to amend the former Treaties. The Treaty gave the opportunity for enhanced cooperation, if this is geared to achieving the EUs main objectives (Article 43). This can be an important area for the Central European region as well if they decide, instead of political disputes against the neighbourhood, to cooperate and use the force of the common power to get more support and strong economy in the region.

23

The Treaty of Lisbon In the regional political issues the text of the Maastricht Treaty was not changed and was transferred in the text of the Lisbon Treaty. Current situation, determining goals for the future Lets see what are the consequences to be drawn from the three different approaches. The three big countries, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom have country-specific attitudes but they use their own attitudes systematically in similar situations. France doesnt continue inclusive policy towards immigrants. This doesnt mean automatically to close the borders, but the attitude is present (see the Mediterranean Unions aim, or the Schengen projects review14). There is no opportunity for the minority living in France to express the own identity and culture. The centralised uniformity does not allow by the political elite to manage the problems and power lines existing in the people. France voted against the opening of the labour market in 200415. The national lobby is very powerful, in a crisis situation France continue introvert and often protectionist policy, sometime against the EU (position against the accession of the UK, Luxembourg compromise (1966), the empty chair policy, opposition against the agrarian reform). The political elite in the United Kingdom is closer to the people. The elite follow the will of the people. As a result, they can react to changes in time. They voted for the opening of the labour market16. Currently the elites opinion is to regulate the freedom of the free movement of workers. But the elite proposed this initiative in a very unfortunate and inappropriate political way. The result is a total political fire17. In addition, a study18 has confirmed that the free movement of the workers didnt cause a big economical crisis affirmed by the Prime Minister. The United Kingdoms attitude is a kind of the spirit of the dealer. From the beginning the UK want an economical EU rather than a political union. Germanys policy shows repetitions as well. The country was divided more times during the history and Germany needed to find solution and planning to the reunification. However it continues its politics to unify Europe, learning from previous mistakes. As the country is politically and economically well-organised, Germany moves slowly through compromise. In the case of the opening of the labour market the transition
Nicolas Sarkozy says France has too many foreigners, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17280647, date of consultation 15/01/2014 15 The accession treaty of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ciprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia(2003), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/new_accession_treaties.htm, date of consultation 09/01/2014 15 France, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=10, date of consultation 10/01/2014 16 United Kingdom, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=14, date of consultation 10/01/2014 17 Schulz Cameronnak: az unis szabad munkaer-ramls nem jratrgyalhat, http://hvg.hu/vilag/20140112_Schulz_Cameronnak_az_unios_szabad_munkaer, date of consultation 13/01/2014, Andor Lszl: A sajnlatos brit vita, http://www.vg.hu/velemeny/publicisztika/andorlaszlo-a-sajnalatos-brit-vita-418132, date of consultation 29/12/2013 18 Nicola Gilpin, Matthew Henty, Sara Lemos, Jonathan Portes and Chris Bullen: The impact of free movement of workers from Central and Eastern Europe on the UK labour market, http://cream-migration.org/files/Working_paper_291.pdf, date of consultation 14/01/2014
14

24

period was maintained with a possibility to involve guest workers to the area suffering from the lack of workers. Germany in the current context has great advantages over the other two countries. The country has learnt during its history the meaning of the Western and Eastern ideology and the practice and consequences of the European integration. This experience can be a good advantage if it needs supporters among the small countries. In Central Europe the player, who speaks the language, win. Germany speaks this language. The conclusions of regional politics The Lisbon Treaty declares the need for the cooperation in the regional politics. The Treaty defines the economic, social and territorial cohesion as a shared competence (Article 4, paragraph 2 c)). This means that to achieve the aim a two-way movement is necessary. The Member States have to act at national and at European level. Ideally, the country determines its aims and the development targets are based on this aims. To achieve these aims the development of the regional competitiveness, the creation of new working places, and the sustainable and balanced development of the rural / urban environment is required19. But the situation is not ideal. For example the development aims and the regional problems cannot be solved in the Mediterranean countries. Even the EU has monitoring procedures, this kind of the conservation of the problems, the permanent unemployment situation in the less developed regions lead to political and economical crises both at national and European level too. The consequence is the reinforcement of the right wing parties and the EU scepticism. If the EU has the will to achieve the aims, as well as the unification of Europe, it needs to listen and understand the voice of the people. The EU has to examine what programs function after the end of the grand period and compare to similar cases to learn what points are not correct in different countries. The inadequate investigation of the problems and the lack of the effective solutions have a negative impact on the regional development objectives. How to capitalise on the advantages disadvantages? The aim of the European Communities was rebuilding Europe, and this aim has not changed during the modifications of the Treaties. To achieve the reunification of Europe the creation of a common market was determined as a basis. One of the problems is that the economy of the Western European countries is highly dependent on the economies of the USA. The unresolved standardisation, the regional policy challenges, the piling up of the tasks and the negative attitude on the free movement of workers weakens the deepening of the integration. This process leads to negative political trends. In crises situations the Member States dont establish common position, but they fight as independent countries not members of the EU. But to finish the integration process and the creation of the common market the Member States have to cooperate. If the fragmentation continues, the weight of the EU will be smaller than the US, Russia and China. The EU has to decrease its dependence from the other economical entities but if they are fighting against the freedom of the free movement of workers instead of the creation of new workplaces, this aim will be not achieved. The common market cant function without human resources.
19 http://www.touteleurope.eu/fr/actions/economie/aide-au-developpement-des-regions.html, date of consultation 13/01/2014

25

The free movement of the workers cant be limited, but within in a fruitful conversation among Member States, it can be channelled regarding the interests. If in a given country there is a program in the regional policy, its method can be shared in a similar situation of an other country. The sharing of the best practices exists but it seems only on papers not in the practice. It is recommended to involve professionals who know, by experience, the language and the way of thinking, the culture of the developing region. Knowledge acquired in school will not replace the experience of years spent in the target area. In the determination of territorial specificities the repeated failures have to be examined clearly. These failures inhibit the survival of the programs after the end of the grant period. Economic cooperation between the countries of Central Europe should be encouraged, not only the dependence of the Western countries economy. The economic cohesion entails political cohesion and reduces the region's instability. The EU's Balkan enlargement should be leaded by Central European countries. The countries have to be proactive; they dont want to wait for the request. They have the experience due to the common history to make propositions, initiatives to determine the direction of the accession. The common aims, the use of action together facilitate the cooperation and the cooperation of the economic development. Maybe in the framework of enhanced cooperation this initiative can be realised.

26

References 1. Treaties of Rome, http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf 2. Maastricht Treaty, http://eurlex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/dat/11992M/htm/11992M.html#0001000001 3. Lisbon Treaty, http://eurlex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML 4. The accession treaty of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ciprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia(2003), http://eurlex.europa.eu/hu/treaties/new_accession_treaties.htm 5. Herencsr-Schottner-Vasali: Initiation in the world of the international institutions and organizations, LHarmattan- Zsigmond Kirly Fiskola, Budapest, 2006, 6. Une reconstruction conomique, http://www.histoiredumonde.net/Unereconstruction-economique.html 7. Nicolas Sarkozy says France has too many foreigners, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17280647 8. France, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=10 9. United Kingdom, http://www.euvonal.hu/index.php?op=mindennapok_tagallamok&id=14 10. Schulz Cameronnak: az unis szabad munkaer-ramls nem jratrgyalhat, http://hvg.hu/vilag/20140112_Schulz_Cameronnak_az_unios_szabad_munkaer 11. Andor Lszl: A sajnlatos brit vita, http://www.vg.hu/velemeny/publicisztika/andor-laszlo-a-sajnalatos-brit-vita418132 12. Nicola Gilpin, Matthew Henty, Sara Lemos, Jonathan Portes and 13. Chris Bullen: The impact of free movement of workers from Central and Eastern Europe on the UK labour market, http://creammigration.org/files/Working_paper_291.pdf 14. http://www.touteleurope.eu/fr/actions/economie/aide-au-developpement-desregions.html 15. Cameron: Free movement in EU needs to be less free, http://www.euractiv.com/uk-europe/cameron-free-movement-eu-needs-fnews-531982 16. Orange alert for eastern and central European workers, http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/news-brief/4067161-orange-alerteastern-and-central-european-workers 17. German conservatives stir up 'welfare tourism' row, http://euobserver.com/social/122339

27