—

citizens’ secure access to their own data and the sharing of health data across borders;

—

better data to advance research, disease prevention and personalised health and care;

—

digital tools for citizen empowerment and person-centred care.

—

How can we encourage continuous active learning, on both how to access information and how to differentiate between reliable and unreliable digital sources, e.g. promoting IC-Health MOOCs? Mass support and training measures are needed to tackle this issue since 47 % of the EU workforce lack sufficient e-skills (28).

—

How can we make resources (e.g. entertainment methods) available that raise people’s interest in making use of reliable digital sources of information?

—

How can we support the transfer of successful programmes? For example, see ‘Sophia’ (29), an innovative health insurance tool in France for patients with diabetes or COPD (chronic obstructive lung disease), based on health coaching. The Sophia programme is inspired by foreign disease management experimentation in the US, Germany and the UK (30).

—

What role can the various educational institutions (universities, adult education centres, etc.) play in strengthening the many skills involved – e.g., working with new technologies, getting involved and managing one’s health in a socially beneficial way, and imparting social and technical expertise?

—

How can existing materials (e.g. regulator-approved information on medicines) be used?

—

How can we stimulate the exchange of knowledge and experience about health literacy and digital skills between the generations?

—

Health literacy is context- and content-specific. A Health Literacy strategy in Europe is recommended for supporting citizens’ rights in health, including a focus on digital health literacy across a person’s entire lifespan.

—

Digital health literacy combines digital abilities with health. Both capabilities require specific education and training.

—

A strategy and implementation plan is needed.

—

The digital world is only accessible to those with access to the internet. How can we close the digital divide in Europe, which excludes regions, islands and rural areas from access to the internet, meaning that people in future will be excluded from access to digital healthcare? Europe and the Member States must make significant investments to guarantee internet access to all if we want everyone to reap the advantages of these developments.

—

Many public services are web-based and require specific skills and resources to make use of them. A digital divide may enhance inequalities in European welfare societies.

—

Environments, settings, communities and cities can help facilitate open and free access to the internet for citizens to actively participate in society.

—

Public-private partnership can support the facilitation of free access to the internet for everyone in Europe.

—

Access to the internet is a human right when governments rely so heavily on digital services.

a)

Economically inactive people should have an access to further training and reskilling projects and receive unemployment benefits at the same time.

b)

There is a need to facilitate, support and promote, with specific and effective measures, the integration of people with disabilities who require more specific employment plans and support schemes.

c)

There is also a need to pay particular attention to other vulnerable groups such as migrants and people connected with the Roma programme.

d)

Of course, many people, for various reasons, give up and no longer register with employment services, and these services therefore need to reconnect with the people concerned and thus reactivate the possibilities of their finding employment.

e)

It is clear that at the level of public employment services, more and better work is needed in the Member States, yet this is clearly a task for which many local employment services do not currently have the capacity; officials should therefore be hired who have the right skills for finding jobs for those who are both looking for work and want to work.

f)

Some EU Member States can certainly offer examples of best practice in resolving these difficulties, which should be replicated throughout the European Union.

g)

Increasing wages to a decent level is also crucial in the EU.

a)

current aggregate labour market indicators contain little relevant information and no clear link to the economically inactive population or the problems that need to be addressed, and are largely based on the individual rather than the family context;

b)

the main focus is limited to the registered unemployed;

c)

there is very limited information about health problems, caring responsibilities or incentives.

a)

no recent work experience;

b)

low levels of education and skills;

c)

very limited or no work experience;

d)

limitations in terms of health;

e)

family care responsibilities;

f)

few job opportunities;

g)

never having been in paid employment;

h)

the existence of discrimination because of age, gender, disability, etc. and the human resources policies of some companies.

a)

careers advice;

b)

a web portal for vacancy notices and job opportunities;

c)

references and information provided directly to those involved;

d)

mobility support devices;

e)

vocational training programmes;

f)

possible subsidies for employers.

a)

the development of adequate, high-quality public social welfare services to meet care needs (especially for children and the elderly) in order to free up those who want to work (mainly women) so that they can do so without worrying - something which is currently not possible due to their family obligations (18);

b)

effective monitoring and evaluation of the impact of public policies to put the economically inactive population back in work, for example:

c)

increasing inclusive growth and well-being through the following dimensions of labour market performance: more and better jobs; inclusivity; resilience and adaptability;

d)

The Commission and Member-States should adopt the ‘3Ps’ (policy principles):

e)

creating jobs in municipalities that are appropriate to the qualifications of economically inactive workers residing in those municipalities, i.e. creating jobs in line with the skills of economically inactive people and improving their performance through appropriate training courses;

f)

creating an environment conducive to strengthening social dialogue (with social partners) at all appropriate levels, while respecting the autonomy of the social partners and collective bargaining, as well as the dialogue with other relevant civil society organisations (19).

a)

focusing on transferable skills;

b)

improving the link between education and training institutions, employers and trade unions;

c)

raising awareness about job opportunities and associated requirements among young people and other unemployed people affected by lack of work;

d)

fostering partnerships between education and training institutions, businesses, employers, the public sector, trade unions and NEETs themselves, as well as other economically inactive groups (including migrants (22));

e)

developing a specific action plan for each sub-group of the economically inactive population, monitoring and evaluating its implementation, correcting any deviations;

f)

reducing weekly working hours, starting with the public services, and creating job opportunities for all.

—

Prevent citizens from being satisfied with their occupations and career paths, lower their perceived level of appreciation and have potential to drag down their wages;

—

Impede personal growth and development and utilisation of individuals’ capacity and potential;

—

Result in lower labour productivity — some estimates show that the loss of productivity (17) due to skills mismatches in the EU is around EUR 0,8 for every hour worked (18);

—

Decrease the competitiveness of companies by slowing and making more expensive the process of hiring and by imposing the need for additional expenditure on training.

—

The EESC calls first for an overarching strategy for sustainability in implementing the Agenda 2030, guaranteed by an ambitious EU budget.

—

Competitiveness and sustainability are not in opposition as long as social and environmental aspects are part and parcel of the definition of competitiveness. Competitiveness must not be defined only by quantity and pricing but preferably by also taking into account European values, quality and sustainability, as part of a fully developed and well-functioning single market.

—

Europe needs a new model of growth, one that is qualitatively different from what we have had thus far, that is more socially inclusive and ecologically sustainable, and able to encourage and accompany convergence of the digital and ecological transitions in our countries and societies.

—

Sustainable investment is a crucial instrument to drive and promote the process of strengthening Europe’s leadership towards a sustainable society. It has to stimulate high-quality job creation, renewable energy, education systems, affordable and accessible green public transport, eco-designed digital technology, research and innovation.

—

European companies need to fulfil their role and their responsibilities and act as leaders in the eyes of the rest of the world if the competitiveness and economic sustainability of our European system is redefined in respect of our one and only planet’s boundaries.

—

A structured Civil Dialogue must become a real tool of democratic participation as provided for in Article 11(1) and (2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) (8).

—

The EESC, as the EU institutional representative of organised civil society, will continue to be an active player in the policy-making process.

—

The European Citizen’s Initiative (ECI), as provided for under Article 11(4) TEU and as the first transnational participatory tool worldwide, also needs further support and improvement. For its part, the EESC has fought for a simpler and more understandable set of rules for its implementation (9), and also acts as a facilitator between the Commission and citizens, in particular by organising the annual ECI Day conference and providing assistance and support to ECI organisers.

—

Youth are to be engaged and to participate in the European political process (10) by promoting broader civic engagement, including through voting, volunteering, joining youth organisations and participating in workplace democracy and social dialogue (11).The EESC will foster youth participation in its activities and develop events targeted at young people, such as ‘Your Europe Your Say’ and the prize for young entrepreneurs.

—

Measures should be taken to ensure increased accountability and transparency of decision-making by EU institutions and national governments, also involving the regional and local level, to gain the support of citizens, such as a reform of the Council’s working methods to improve transparency and resolving the accountability and transparency issues linked to the extensive use of closed ‘trilogues’ prior to the adoption of acts at the first and second reading of the ordinary legislative procedure (12) (13).

—

Institutional mechanisms should be established to increase the impact of EESC opinions in EU policy-shaping and decision-making processes, for instance through enhanced monitoring of the follow-up given to the Committee’s opinions and the conclusion of a cooperation agreement with the EU Council to ensure, inter alia, the systematic provision to Council working groups of information on Committee opinions.

—

Garnering public support for the implementation of the UN Agenda 2030 for a new social deal is paramount.

—

A new ‘social deal’ that offers all citizens a fairer and more equal society is indispensable. That is why the EESC calls for a social action programme in order to transpose the UN Agenda 2030 to all levels.

—

The EESC calls for a general improvement of and increased investment in education systems and supports a universal entitlement to lifelong learning that enables people to acquire skills and to reskill and upskill; stepping up investments in the institutions, policies and strategies that will support people through future of work transitions; and implementing a transformative and measurable agenda for gender equality are all elements that should receive wide support (14).

—

Public policies and legislative measures must ensure that all European citizens and residents enjoy the same level of protection and can exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms. The EU must improve its policies and actions to ensure gender equality, in addition to guaranteeing that all people facing multiple forms of discrimination have equal opportunities in society.

—

In the context of increasing concerns over divergence in the progress of Member States, measures to ensure a minimum wage and minimum income, as part of a process of social convergence in the EU, may constitute an important element of social protection. This would help to achieve a decent standard of living in all countries, while also helping to support growth and for enhancing convergence, or avoiding divergence, within the EU (15).

—

A sustainable transition requires investment in effective and integrated social protection systems offering quality services (16).

—

Social dialogue and robust collective bargaining systems between the social partners should prevail as key tools in order to anticipate and manage the transitions and changes.

—

The measures above should help create a level-playing field to facilitate full implementation of the single market.

—

This strategy must ensure that at least the Paris Agreement has to be fully and immediately implemented and reflected through alignment of the EU’s emissions reduction targets for 2030 and 2050 with the commitment to limit temperature increases to max. 1°C and through ambitious EU climate policies, including a rapid phase-out of all fossil fuels, moving from energy efficiency towards an absolute decrease in energy use. The EU should accelerate the just and sustainable transition to the highest possible level of renewable energy supply (21) which is clean, affordable, supports community ownership and does not lead either to energy poverty or to undermining the sustainable competitiveness of European companies at global level.

—

The Finance-Climate Pact must cover all aspects of a climate change policy, such as a just transition to mitigate the effects of change, and compensate for the damages and losses, as well as real policies for adaptation to climate change.

—

The EESC reiterates its call for the development of a comprehensive food policy (22) in the EU, with the aim of providing healthy diets from sustainable food systems, linking agriculture to nutrition and ecosystem services, and ensuring supply chains which safeguard public health for all sections of European society. A fair distribution of the added value along the food supply chain is essential.

—

Agriculture could be part of the solution in mitigating climate change (circular economy, CO2 storage, etc.) since it covers a huge part of European territory. Moreover, sustainable agriculture plays an important role in maintaining the socio-economic fabric in rural areas.

—

EU must transform a linear economy into a circular, carbon-free economy. Circular economy policies should ensure that cycles are long-lasting, small, local and clean. For some specific industrial activities, the size of the loops can tend to be large (23).

—

Common standards should be set up and enforced to deliver clean air and water and to protect our oceans. Ambitious measures must be implemented to stop deforestation and biodiversity loss in Europe and globally, and to end the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, including from the Global South. Measures should be taken to bring European consumption levels into line with the Earth’s capacity to produce, including through implementing sufficiency strategies (24).

—

The ongoing fourth industrial revolution is radically modifying the global economy, and particularly manufacturing and industry-related services. Europe needs a true digital transformation to regain global sustainable competitiveness and deliver sustainable growth and jobs. Europe needs an overarching shift to become the most dynamic digital region in the world, taking into account the digital economy’s global nature and business integration in global value chains.

—

Supporting such innovative models represents an opportunity for the European Union to become a leader in innovative sustainable economic models that make the idea of economic prosperity inseparable from high-quality social protection and environmental sustainability, and define a ‘European brand’.

—

European companies have to remain innovation and creativity drivers and respect high standards regarding labour, consumers and the environment across Europe. While smart policy-making and good governance have an important part to play in determining the right framework, it is businesses with their workers, in close cooperation with scientists and researchers, which provide innovation and solutions in response to society’s needs.

—

A business environment that helps prepare for the future is based on open markets and fair competition, where social and environmental aspects are part of its definition, and that provides enabling and supportive conditions for doing business.

—

Guidance and support must be made available to enable all companies and SMEs in particular, to embrace digitalisation, reversing inadequate trends in technology and innovation investment through awareness-raising, encouraging financing, supporting R&D and investing in adequate skills.

—

Just like its diplomacy and its neighbourhood policy, the EU’s trade policy must reflect and be consistent with its own internal values as the global leader in sustainability. The EU should be able to maintain its competitiveness and manage its alliances with key partners, whilst maintaining, reinforcing and improving its model of high standards in the environmental and social spheres.

—

The EESC calls in particular for an ambitious trade policy agenda at all three levels, unilateral, bilateral and multilateral — a policy that will create growth and jobs in the EU while promoting a rules-based trade policy at the global level.

—

In unilateral terms, the EU should modernise and improve the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) and Everything But Arms (EBA) in order to encourage the development of the Least Developed Countries and developing countries.

—

In bilateral terms, the EU should continue to open new markets and increase business opportunities and consumer satisfaction with more partners while ensuring high social and environmental standards in agriculture, industry and services.

—

In multilateral terms, the EU should play a leading role in the reform of the WTO in order to avoid paralysis of the Appellate Body of the Dispute Settlement Body. The EESC recently adopted an ambitious and forward-looking set of proposals for this reform in the short and medium term (27). The aims are to ensure that the WTO, the sole guardian of international trade, makes a fundamental contribution to achieving the SDGs, maintains consistency between trade rules and international labour standards, and facilitates the fulfilment of commitments made under the Paris Agreement.

—

Openness to trade requires effective trade defence instruments and an operational screening mechanism for Foreign Direct Investment in strategic EU sectors. This is of course to protect the EU and its consumers, workers and companies against unfair and predatory trade practices.

—

It is essential to deepen cooperation at international level with all the relevant organisations (OECD, UNECE, ILO, WTO and so on) in order to efficiently address global challenges including climate change, poverty, fraud, tax evasion and cyberattacks.

—

Public authorities need to drive sustainable development goals through their public procurement contracts by proactively applying environmental and social procurement criteria as defined in the new European legislation on public procurement.

—

Basic public services (30) such as education, health, childcare and public transport, and public goods such as clean drinking water, clean air and unspoiled soil, etc., must be accessible for all, at affordable costs.

—

The necessary reform of EMU should include greater tax coordination between its members and a unified representation of the euro in international organisations.

—

The EESC supports fair taxation and the fight against fraud, tax evasion, money laundering and the financial practices of tax havens; a common objective of EU institutions, governments and business must be to work together in order to put in place efficient mechanisms such as the two anti-tax avoidance directives (31).

—

Coordination in the fight against fraud and tax evasion should include measures against corporate base erosion and profit shifting: the European Commission estimated that this accounted for EUR 50-70 billion annually before measures started to be implemented. Non-collected VAT is estimated to be in the region of EUR 150 billion every year.

—

The EU must cooperate with other economic regions to effectively fight corruption and tax evasion worldwide and to ensure that international rules on corporation tax are clear, transparent, objective and predictable.

—

The public is increasingly demanding that taxation be used to ensure social cohesion, to combat global warming and to promote sustainable growth.

—

The EESC calls for effective and coordinated taxation measures to ensure that all companies pay their fair share of taxes and contribute to national and European public budgets to enable governments to meet their social rights (32). The EESC supports the Commission’s proposal on the establishment of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) (33).

—

The new business models using internet platforms and other digital tools have resulted in companies relying less on a physical presence in a country. The EESC believes that it is very important to develop new principles on how to attribute corporate profits to an EU country and tax them, in dialogue with trading partners, and to actively participate in the ongoing discussions at OECD/G20 level on a global agreement on the digitalised economy, in order to avoid any escalation of trade and tax tensions between major economic players in the world (34).

—

The EU needs to ensure that all its internal and external policies are coherent and aligned with the SDGs, so that the principles of efficiency, proportionality and sustainability are duly considered.

—

The use of the European Commission’s better regulation tools is another way to ensure further mainstreaming of sustainable development in European policies. All Commission impact assessments must evaluate environmental, climate, social and economic impacts so that sustainability is duly considered and factored in. Ex post evaluations must also analyse all three dimensions in a strong integrated approach. Social partner consultations are also required, respecting Treaty provisions requesting the specific consultation of labour and management in relation to legislation on social issues (Art. 154 (2)); consultations with the European Economic and Social Committee, the European Committee of Regions and national parliaments form another component of the better regulation toolbox to meet the inclusiveness requirement that is at the heart of the 2030 Agenda.

—

Taking into account the sustainable development goals, the REFIT Platform and impact assessments and evaluations must help to ensure that legislation is favourable to business and citizens. These tools should, in the future, continue to use all available sources, including civil society, to assess how to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of EU legislation in view of its objectives. These tools should contribute to extensive regulatory improvement of sustainable development in all its dimensions, aiming not only to simplify and reduce unnecessary burdens and to ensure effective achievement of legislative objectives without lowering them, but also to help to review, validate, amend, enhance or better enforce existing legislation.

—

The European Semester as the EU’s economic governance framework has some focus on employment and social performance, but it is weak on the dangers presented by climate change and on the EU’s progress towards reaching the Paris targets, as reported in the Annual Growth Survey 2019 (35). The EESC calls for a forward-looking sustainable development strategy embedded in a Sustainable Development Cycle, based on complementary social, economic and environmental indicators and targets.

—

Social dialogue must be recognised as a tool for implementing the development agenda. Social dialogue requires an enabling environment and an effective institutional framework. This begins with respect for freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. The EU should work with the social partners to promote sound industrial relations practices and smoothly functioning labour administrations.

—

The European Union should strengthen its ties with the Member States and regain the trust of its citizens through a well-implemented Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) approach that enables integrated local development and the involvement of citizens and their organisations at grassroots level. The EESC is convinced that CLLD could have many advantages as a successful European local development tool (36).

—

The EU should adopt policies and measures that endorse safe, orderly and regular migration and also strengthen inclusion and social cohesion. The EU should work in closer coordination with the ILO as far as the labour migration and integration programmes are concerned.

—

The EESC calls for safe, legal routes for refugees when they come to the EU. A coordinated approach from all Member States and European and national stakeholders, based on shared responsibility, fair allocation, convergence and respect for fundamental rights, is needed to include more options for family reunification, relocation and resettlement.

—

Non-integration bears economic, socio-cultural and political risks and costs. Hence, investment in migrant integration is the best insurance policy against potential future costs, problems and tensions.

—

Integration is a two-way process and the host community and migrants have rights and duties; therefore the responsibility needs to be shared between them both. It is neither fair nor sustainable to expect newcomers to integrate unaided in the face of considerable social, cultural, and economic barriers. To facilitate this process, public policies should tackle the fears, concerns and worries of diverse sections of the population in EU societies in order to avoid anti-EU and xenophobic discourses. To do so, the relevant policies should include a clear, consistent and reasoned set of obligations, as well as a consistent denunciation of anti-migrant rhetoric and behaviours.

—

War, climate change and lack of prospects in third countries may create a continued and even increased influx of refugees and migrants. Limiting push factors for migration in general is a global challenge. There will be increased migration (including climate refugees) of all types due to the growing phenomenon of displaced people. For that, the EU must be better prepared to coordinate their distribution across the Member States. The EESC has already highlighted how unbalanced economic processes can add to destabilisation in this context. Therefore the EESC supports the position that the Lisbon Treaty provides a sufficiently broad mandate to revise immigration policy in order to regulate the status of ‘environmentally displaced individuals’.

—

To face the economic, social and environmental priorities, new as well as ongoing, the EU needs, in this politically critical moment, a strong EU Budget. The Commission proposal on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021-2027 is modest and unambitious. Like the European Parliament and the European Committee of the Regions, the EESC calls for resources to be set at 1,3 % of GNI and for revenues to come mostly from the EU’s own resources, establishing the tax figures proposed by the High Level Group on Own Resources (HLGOR), chaired by Mario Monti (38).

—

In the EESC’s view, resources have to be transferred to the Member States in accordance with criteria of distributive justice to restore the path of economic and social convergence that was interrupted by the crisis (39).

—

The EESC considers it necessary for the next MFF to increase funding to allow for (i) the implementation by the Member States of the Gothenburg Declaration on the European Pillar of Social Rights to stimulate the creation of quality jobs in the context of sustainable development, (ii) the realisation of the UN Agenda 2030, and (iii) the implementation of the Paris Agreement promoting just transitions towards green and digitised societies.

—

The EU needs ambitious budgets that are instruments of policies that develop a clear strategy for strengthening the Union, with more integration, more democracy, stronger support for civil society organisations both within the EU and outside it, greater support for companies in addressing environmental and digital challenges, a stronger social dimension and more support for rural life. Only in this way can the EU limit and overcome internal centrifugal forces and deal with external geopolitical risks.

—

The EESC supports the proposal to make the receipt of EU funds by the Member States conditional upon respect for the principle of the rule of law, a fundamental pillar of values of the Union according to Article 2 of the TEU.

—

The pivotal role of the EESC in bridging the gap with European citizens must be better recognised and supported by the EU.

—

The EU must also decentralise its citizens’ dialogues so that municipalities and regions can begin to develop a joint European purpose and identity.

—

EU policies should be much more responsive to proposals by citizens, communities and civil society organisations, giving them a reason to be involved.

—

The EESC should evaluate the implementation of EU policies in the Member States each year, on the basis of the policy objectives set out in this opinion, in order to provide concrete responses to citizens on the impact of EU membership on their daily lives.

—

free movement of people, goods, capital and services;

—

the largest single market in the world;

—

increased economic interconnectivity, and free and frictionless trade;

—

common trade agreements negotiated from a position of strength for all MS;

—

high-quality and improved social welfare guided by the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR);

—

the European social model;

—

increased cooperation in intelligence, military matters, and law enforcement activity;

—

improved environmental norms, air and water quality;

—

protection of citizens' fundamental right to privacy in the digital environment;

—

improved health and safety standards;

—

reciprocal healthcare systems across the Union;

—

anti-discrimination rules and policies, especially regarding minorities and women;

—

extraordinary educational opportunities based on exchange programmes such as Erasmus+;

—

etc.