The State of the European Union. The European Parliament faces its most important elections yet

SOCIAL EUROPE – NAMING THE MYTH, PRESERVING THE MODEL AND TAKING CONCRETE ACTION 87 Implementing four pillars of regulatory policy Firstly: protect national achievements, nurture catch-up development The EU’s economic and social policy needs to be restructured in a way that respects and no long- er undermines existing social rights, including the national social security and collective bar- gaining systems. This applies in particular to the eurozone. This restructuring is unlikely to take place solely on the basis of a non-binding rec- ommendation for individual social rights. National welfare states and collective bar- gaining systems will remain important, if not the most important, building blocks of a social Europe in the foreseeable future. However, without the accompanying European regula- tions, which draw a red line under the mutual race to the bottom in liberalised capitalism, there is little hope of achieving a social Europe. Ultimately, an intelligent mix of more Europe in some areas and less Europe in others, is re- quired. European integration must be structured in such a way that it supports economic and social catch-up development in the Member States. Secondly: European economic and fiscal policy needs to focus more on growth A policy that enables Member States to invest more, rather than subjecting them to an exces- sively rigorous budgetary policy, is needed. Additional EU funding for targeted investment in infrastructure, education and energy would be helpful in this regard. In terms of European policy, one of the most important ways in which European and German social democracy made its mark in recent years was in its insistence on a broad-based “invest- ment offensive” for Europe. The European di- mension of this insistence during the crisis was well-founded in terms of economic policy. The prospect of also satisfying an existing structural investment requirement in Germany broadened political support for this approach. While the widespread fundamental support for a European investment offensive made it possible to spo- radically increase investment, it did not result in a macroeconomic investment offensive. Meanwhile, the economic situation has im- proved significantly in the eurozone as a whole, which is why the economic argument for invest- ment no longer carries weight. And the elimina- tion of structural underfunding in Member States could be seen, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, as a national rather than a European responsibility. To exploit the political momentum behind the recent European invest- ment offensive, without getting into greater dif- ficulties of justification, it would make sense for future European investment to focus to a cer- tain extent on European public goods. Thirdly: Taking into account the provision of European public goods The quality of life for citizens depends largely on the availability of public or collective goods. Regional disparities are increasing in all Member States. Quality of life in our cities, towns and villages is determined by the condition of public streets and squares, public buildings, schools and cultural institutions. The quality of the envi- ronment depends on the cleanliness of the air and water, intact natural habitats, biodiversity and the wealth of resources. The social quality of our society is determined by dealing humanely