As we all know, on Mayday this year, the European Union will grow from 15 to 25 countries and from 380 million citizens to 455 million.

Europe’s trade unions have been at the forefront of those working for Europe’s reunification. Since the fall of the iron curtain we have welcomed into membership of the European Trade Union Confederation a range of organisations from the Central European countries. They play a full part among our membership of 77 national trade union confederations from 35 countries.

Enlargement represents above all a unique opportunity to bring together the peoples of Europe on the basis of fundamental democratic values. It is a means of ensuring peace and political stability in Europe and of contributing to economic and social progress and to the improvement of living and working conditions for all.

At the same time, the single market in Europe was always going to cause huge changes and restructuring for millions of working people. This has been supported by the ETUC on the condition that a strong social platform of worker rights, social dialogue, collective bargaining, decent welfare states and high quality public services and services of general interest are put in place to help people handle change.

It is noteworthy that the Single European Act, which entered into force in 1987 and enshrined the single market, placed occupational health and safety under the Qualified Majority Voting provisions of the Treaty. The clear understanding was that Member States should not compete by undercutting each other on such a vital matters.

We are keenly aware that the history of countries from central Europe would lead them to react against any attempt to impose heavy-handed supranational rules.

But we reject the scaremongering of those who say that Brussels is now to replace Moscow. That is a travesty.

The ETUC worked hard through the European Convention to enable an enlarged EU to function properly, with democratic, effective and transparent institutions, based on active European citizenship rights.

We will continue to fight for those objectives. Failure will not attract our citizens towards supporting the EU’s development, but rather it would make them question the value of the European project.

What we want to avoid is the objective, aimed at by some in the EU, of aping the American business way and its mere reliance on shareholder value.

We are well aware of the challenge we face from those who complain that membership of the EU means the imposition of rules.

But we need to remember who benefits from the absence of rules - the strong who bully the weak; the rich who can patronise the poor; the powerful who can dictate through force.

The European Union, for all its faults and irritations is a vehicle for solidarity, for checks on the strong, for help to the weak.

Workers can pay the highest price for the lack of proper regulation on health and safety. If there is a red line to be drawn in any negotiation, anywhere, this is it.

So it gives me no pleasure to point the finger at my own Member State’s use of the opt-out on the Working Time Directive. That is unacceptable, and we fully support those in the European Parliament who voted a few days ago to bring the British Government before the European Court of Justice for breaching its obligations. I hope that the Government will reconsider its position and settle this matter without any need for legal proceeding.

And we say ‘no’ to those, like at the International Monetary Fund, who would impose extreme free-market measures on us in the name of labour market flexibility. They fail to recognise the vital importance of strong labour market institutions and their key role in some of the world’s most successful economies.

The accession countries have made tremendous efforts to incorporate the acquis. But there is still work to be done in some areas and we would wish to see transition periods, particularly on health and safety measures reduced to the minimum.

I hope we all agree that no country will, in the longer run, be able to build its competitiveness on the basis of low-wage, poor-standards production sites. If we are to compete, it will be by taking the high road that creates good jobs in a safe environment.

New countries and existing Member States have many problems in common. The fragmentation of the workforce, precarious forms of employment, systematic subcontracting of activities at the lowest costs are creating a negative context for health and safety. The AZF catastrophe in Toulouse is a clear example of that situation.

Everywhere in Europe precarious workers, and in particular temporary agency workers, are suffering more accidents than the other workers. So it is not just up to the accession countries to catch up. We all need to move forwards together.

Under the conditions of a globalised economy national-level regulation is no longer adequate. Globally accepted rules must be developed and standards should be raised worldwide.

Europe must give a lead. And to lead, Europe itself needs a clear strategy.

In June 2001, the ETUC called for a new impetus in health and safety. The Commission subsequently adopted a communication called “a new strategy in OSH 2002-2006”. We support its description of the situation: indeed, many elements came from the ETUC contribution.

But the fact is that it lacks a real strategy with concrete initiatives, tools and a timetable.

Apart from promoting social dialogue on stress, which puts the onus on trade unions and employers to reach agreement, we have seen little from DG employment in the health and safety field. The debate on REACH, which I recognise is controversial, could have gained from a measured input from the health and safety sector in the Commission.

We are now expecting the Commission’s report on the application of OSH directives. It has been delayed several times.

Our global assessment is the following. The legal implementation of directives is not enough. It is a precondition of possible improvements. In the last ten years, the European Foundation surveys on working conditions and Eurostat statistics on industrial accidents show that no serious improvement has been realised.

The burden of bad working conditions, excessive working time and precarious forms of employment is very high for the European workers. We need a strong commitment of the public authority to change that situation: more resource for Labour Inspection, for OSH research, for working environment funds.

At the same time, an EU strategy cannot be defined in isolation. Cooperation with the ILO is a priority for the trade union movement. For a start, all EU countries should ratify all the ILO conventions. That is a basic and urgent step.

Then, ILO conventions and EU directives should be articulated in order to promote the best standards.

We also need to look at ourselves as social partners. The European social dialogue is a determinant of modernisation and transformation of European industry. The social partners must be involved in the implementation of policy at all levels.

To underpin social dialogue, we need a strong system of industrial relations based upon the recognition of the crucial role of trade unions. That is why the cooperation between our unions are so important to revitalise health and safety policy.

This conference is just one element of a cooperation initiated about ten years ago. It will help us to define a joint strategy.

So you have important work to do in the next two days.

I wish you all the best in your discussions.