lThe report by Mario Draghi on European competitiveness, says Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, should be the basis for the Union’s action over the next five years. It must be said that the report is of quality. Because of its very precise diagnosis, that of a “slow agony” of our continent, in the words of its author. With his lack of jargon, a convinced European, Draghi does not hesitate to test the bureaucracy of the Commission and the States and their poor governance in the management of public financing. By his support for reforms, particularly transversal ones. By demonstrating that the fragmentation of Europe into twenty-seven countries that jealously guard their prerogatives in practically all areas represents a crippling competitive disadvantage and makes us non-existent on the world stage. The only way to increase purchasing power in a sustainable way and maintain our sovereignty is to innovate and improve our competitiveness. However, we have fallen behind the United States, which has the advantage in this area, and we will soon be left behind by China.
However, many commentators seem to remember only the significant sum of money from the 400-page report that is linked to the financing of the investments necessary for the recovery of our economies. Do certain potential industrial beneficiaries and opponents of “austerity” – the austerity of a France with a 6% deficit and heir to fifty years of uninterrupted deficits? – applaud the financial ambition of the report? The frugal states of northern Europe, on the other hand, see the prospect of a misuse of public money and a new subsidy for southern Europe following the European recovery plan of 2020, whose main beneficiaries are Italy and Spain, and a little France.
Two scenarios could then emerge, each as damaging as the other. One where we (strategically) forget about the project, the reason for this expenditure, and focus on the pie to be shared. There would be no growth and public debt would only increase. The other where the Draghi report would be thrown into the dustbin of history, like so many other reports. To give the (real) Draghi plan a chance, we must proceed differently.
Joint renovation project
Starting by wanting to agree on the level of spending is the best way to turn the plan into mush during the political negotiations that will follow. Logic would dictate that Europeans would prefer to agree on a project: for example, do they agree to create the institutions that will give a chance to the disruptive innovations that Europe so desperately needs? It is worth remembering that none of the twenty largest technology companies and none of the twenty largest start-ups in the world are European and the most profitable activities in the value chain are left abroad? For the moment, as both the report on innovation in Europe (“EU Innovation Policy. How to Escape the Middle Technology Trap” (TSE-Bocconi-CES Ifo Munich) and the Draghi report show, the European institutions are not at all adapted to stop the slow technological agony that we are experiencing.
You have 29.41% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
