Report shows huge division between old and new Member States on Lisbon progress
A report by the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise indicates how far behind the current EU Member States the acceding countries are in terms of meeting the Lisbon objectives, but suggests that a difference in attitudes between the two blocks could lead to the new Member States overtaking their counterparts by 2010. The EU's Heads of State and Government agreed in 2000 to take measures aimed at making Europe the world's most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy by 2010. It is widely known that while progress in some areas has been made, the EU as a whole is still a long way from this target. 'As long as Member States neglect commonly agreed rules and measures, and the European Parliament and Council block EU proposals, the credibility for the Lisbon Strategy will be lost,' states the Swedish report. The paper shows that the acceding countries have a long way to go before catching up with the current Member States, but notes that the reform process has been fairly fast since the start of accession negotiations. 'Note also that the new Member States are taking the Lisbon Strategy seriously. Who knows, they might be ahead of many EU-15 Member States by 2010,' states the report. The Confederation of Swedish Enterprise outlines five key business priorities: the value of enterprise; establishing an efficient internal market; competition and lower taxes; creating a growing and flexible labour market; and stimulating structural and technological renewal. In terms of stimulating technological renewal, the report highlights investment in information and communications technologies (ICT) and biotechnology as very important, and emphasises the value of a well-developed and functional intellectual property rights system. 'Member States that due to national reasons are blocking the adoption of a community patent that can meet users' needs, and that is competitive in a global context, have to reconsider their positions,' states the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise. If they cannot agree on a system that would meet the needs of industry and EU competitiveness, 'Europe and its industry is better off without it,' it adds. Figures on employment in high-tech manufacturing illustrate the size of the high-tech economy in individual countries. Ireland is clearly at the top of the table with close to 20 per cent of manufacturing jobs in the high-tech industries. The table can almost be divided in two, with the current EU Member States in the top half, and the acceding countries bringing up the rear. However, there are exceptions in both groups. Hungary has a large high-tech manufacturing industry, and occupies second place after Ireland in terms of employment in the sector. On the other hand, Spain, Greece and Portugal occupy three of the five positions at the bottom of the table. A table illustrating patent applications to the European Patent Office in 2001 gives a similar picture. Sweden comes out on top, having filed over 350 applications per million inhabitants, and is then followed by 11 of its fellow Member States. Slovenia pushes Spain out of the top half of the table, while Greece and Portugal are much lower down. While the report describes the challenges for the acceding countries as 'numerous', the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise is optimistic, citing the relatively high educational level in most of these countries as a positive factor. Obstacles to growth remain the legacy of old industrial investments, environmental damage and poor public administration.