[To be checked against delivery]

President, dear Philippe, Andrea, Ralf, Ladies and Gentlemen,

You invited us to celebrate an anniversary, the 20th anniversary of the first European social dialogue agreement. There is something with anniversaries which always bothers me... Every year, you get one year older. Otherwise, it would really be nice. It gives a chance to party and to remember, and to remember here, today, is rather pleasant.

Of course, I am keen to evaluate our progresses, our difficulties and prospects or, in other words, to make a “health check”.

But, whatever this check might reveal, there is one thing I want to say right from the start of this speech.

Europe is at a crossroads. . The economic and financial stability of our countries is at risk. Europe is not working. Finance ministers cannot find the way out nor can governments. The strongest countries/country do/does not realise there is fire at their/its doorstep(s).

So, why should we still talk about social dialogue? Is it really important? Or is it just a way to take our minds off Europe’s burning house?

Well, yes and no.

Yes, it is, because dialogue between us, employers and trade unions, has not in itself the power to pave the way towards a solution. The power to find a solution today is in the hands of democratically elected representatives, of our governments and, particularly, in the hands of the German Chancellor, Mrs. Merkel, and of the President of the European Central Bank, Mr. Draghi.

It is neither in Germany’s political or economic interests that Europe falls to pieces. Unfortunately, for those decisions, social dialogue is powerless.

And no, it is not, because the outcome of this crisis will either be more Europe ,less Europe or no more Europe at all.

In all three cases, it will not work without social dialogue between trade unions and employers or between trade unions, employers and governments; it will not work without national and European bi- or tripartite agreements which will be the only ones capable of implementing economically balanced and socially fair solutions.

These bi- or tripartite agreements should take place at both national and European level.

Thus, a genuine and constructive dialogue is more than ever necessary.

Of course, in the context of the crisis I mentioned, the immediate issue of dialogue for the European Trade Union Confederation, and for every trade union in Europe, is employment. It is also about fighting unemployment and poverty, and avoiding breaking up social security and public services.

We know we must take initiatives and even show some imagination. This is forced upon us by the complexity and breakdown of the labour market and, more generally, by the social evolution. We must improve the living and working conditions of all workers within a sound economic framework and strong companies.

We must explain our conclusions to the European institutions and public authorities at all levels. It is for these institutions and public authorities to take our messages and findings into account. I do not believe there is enough of that today.

We must also, and with equal force, commit to implementing our decisions at national level. This is crucial to our credibility.

Social dialogue is bipolar, it goes in two directions: on the one hand, it is intended for the European institutions but, on the other hand, it must be effective at national level.

We support this two-way social dialogue.

Since 1991, the European social dialogue has produced not insignificant results. At cross-industry level alone, there are seven European frame agreements, two action frameworks and some 60 joint reports, recommendations, declarations, positions and compilations of best practices. And this does not include the important results of the sectoral social dialogue.

We have also developed our own work programmes, real agendas and roadmaps of the social partners.

A recent survey amongst our affiliates to evaluate the social dialogue has resulted in one drawback and one strong encouragement.

First, the drawback. The texts’ content is considered to be getting worse and worse; this is due to the transition of agreements, transposed into directives, to agreements implemented by the social partners. The lack of implementation of these joint texts is also blamed.

It is necessary to clarify the “rights and obligations” linked to each instrument in terms of its implementation, follow-up and evaluation.

Now, for the strong point. The political will of ETUC affiliates to strengthen the European social dialogue is unanimous. Despite difficulties, the vast majority of member organisations consider that the European social dialogue is a Plus for workers.

Another strong point stems from the fact that social dialogue involves European social partners in European decision-making procedures.

We shall soon start a dialogue on working time. It will not be easy. For us, one key principle is that existing protections cannot be undermined at European level. Our role is to identify potential solutions if and where they exist.

A quality social dialogue also involves synergies at its different levels: cross-industry, sectoral, company. These levels must be coordinated.

In the absence of a cross-industry or sectoral framework, company-level social dialogue runs the risk of being submitted to the diktats of the markets. This risk is considerably reduced if social dialogue is taking place at sectoral or cross-industry level.

A national, sectoral or cross-industry dialogue is important because it clearly indicates where are and what are socially acceptable and fair limits to economic competition. This is what supports a social market economy.

Before concluding, I must say that I am deeply concerned about the fact that this social dialogue we are so often and so pompously referring to at European level is actually in real danger at national level.

A genuine social dialogue demands that governments and employers consider the dialogue between trade unions and employers as being part of the solution rather than part of the problem. This requires respecting trade union rights, and supporting and looking after the structures which make social dialogue work.

This, unfortunately, is not the case in many European countries today. It is even the reverse. Trade union rights, whether directly or indirectly, are under attack or violated. I should in particular mention Hungary, the Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria and many others. I will keep saying that we cannot praise the virtues of European dialogue whilst ignoring the deterioration of the conditions of national dialogue. It is indeed a matter to be dealt with at national level but let us remind you that social dialogue is part of the Treaty and that it is the Commission’s responsibility to see to it that the Treaty is implemented.

As you will have gathered, the European social dialogue is serious business for ETUC, not just a showcase. The 4th European social partners work programme must be a new step in that direction.

ETUC has committed to, is committed and will continue to commit to being a critical but also constructive partner in the social dialogue.

I thank you for your attention.