EU is a control freak, makes small countries feel choked

Recent decisions on regulating the Internet and workforce movement has created divisions

Weary of lecturing, control and the way money is spent, one member has its bags packed and is walking out the door. Others are descending into name calling as conflicts escalate. If the European Union were a family, it would be labelled dysfunctional, if not in crisis. The UK has decided to bid its farewell after 45 years of residency, taking with it the financial and intellectual contributions of the third-richest member. Remaining members carry on, a few considering the possibility of yet more grand initiatives and regulations, yet they also appear increasingly at odds.

And the neighbours have certainly noticed. “The European Parliament seems to view regulation not as an unfortunate necessity but an exciting opportunity,” said a tweet from the US that went viral in no time.

But the days of both overarching proposals and new fine-grain regulations could be numbered, at least in the medium term. Eurosceptic parties are on the rise in many EU nations, and new elections for European Parliament set for next May could greatly alter the complexion of the 751-member body.

The pushback has already started, most publicly with Italy’s new government submitting a budget that defies Euroepean Union guidelines. The resistance is also evident on proposals of the European Commission, the bureaucracy that administers the bloc. The €94.1-billion programme called Horizon Europe, which is scheduled to start in 2021, is a case in point. The programme would cover numerous research fields in an attempt to make and commercialise innovation.

But things are not faring as hoped for the European Commission. Research ministries in individual countries have declined several proposals crucial to the Horizon Europe initiative and for now it seems dead in the water.

Another grand scheme is the “harmonisation” of taxes and fiscal policies across the European Union. Critics vigorously balk at the notion of Brussels regulating collection and administration of tax revenues across member countries, so even this plan remains on the drawing board.

Doru Peter Frantescu, co-founder and CEO of VoteWatch Europe, says if the makeup of the EU parliament is fundamentally different after next May’s elections “it will be harder for the EU to make large, ambitious regulatory plans”.

“It is not a monolith,” says Frantescu, whose organisation tracks data and provides analysis on the EU’s politics. “The composition could change, substantially affecting decisions that are made.”

That, in fact, has already happened, he notes. Following Brexit, the European Union has lost one of its major funding contributors. This will severely impact the budget. Adding to uncertainty is the loss of the UK’s anti-regulation voice in EU affairs.

Now other critics have come to the fore, notably Italy and Hungary. “After next year’s election, there is likely to be more fragmentation and it will be harder to build consensus,” he says. At present, the parliament is controlled by a coalition of the People’s Party, Liberals and Socialists, but their days may be numbered.

The two biggest EU stalwarts — Germany and France — are tackling crisis at their home fronts. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has weakened as a leader after the recent elections, while French President Emmanuel Macron’s vision for an even greater EU met with little support when he outlined it a year ago.

Frantescu thinks the EU might have overstepped its mandate on regulation “but it depends on the sector”. He points to a recent decision reached at the behest of France. Pushed by French trade unions, the new regulation places restrictions on use of truck drivers from Eastern Europe. “This goes against one of the fundamental principles of the EU, the free movement of labour,” says Frantescu. Following approval of an online copyright law that has inflamed the Internet sector, some see EU regulation as counterproductive to even its own intent. When implemented the new law would require online news aggregators to keep records and pay local publications, creating a bureaucratic barrier to online traffic crucial to advertising revenues at the publications themselves. Instead of helping the small operations, it could well damage them. Notably, the EU often formulates elaborate schemes that can only be complied by big players. There’s not much thought for smaller players. For instance, a small startup with a bright idea often has to clear various hurdles to receive assistance offered in the EU’s much-vaunted push for innovation. Google, with its vast staffing, can now navigate the labyrinth and comply. But that certainly would not have been possible when it started 22 years ago. “The enormous amount of paperwork discourages people from getting involved,” says Frantescu.

But he points to a couple areas where the Europeean Union has proven a great success: The Schengen Agreement that opened the borders of European countries and widened the reach of Erasmus programme for education and life enrichment. In the last 30 years, this has helped 4.4 million students move abroad for studies. And many think that’s where it should stay, a devolution that returns to a few programmes that are done well. Many are still scratching their heads, wondering how the EU ever got in the business of controlling minutiae such as the shape of cucumbers or the size of vacuum cleaner motors in the first place. To those forced to comply, regulation is certainly not an “exciting opportunity”.

Many are still scratching their heads, wondering how the EU ever got in the business of controlling minutiae such as the shape of cucumbers or the size of vacuum cleaner motors in the first place. To those forced to comply, regulation is certainly not an “exciting opportunity”-