Education policy
- (Photo: European Commission)
In the Lisbon Treaty education is dealt with under the heading of "supporting, coordinating or complementary actions". In this section, legally binding acts can be adopted, but direct harmonisation of national laws is not permitted.
The EU has only limited powers ("competence") in the area of education policy. In fact, it can contribute to the development of quality education in the Member States. Such incentive measures can be decided for EU education policy by a qualified majority in the Council and co-decision with the European Parliament (Art. 165-166 TFEU, previously Art.149 TEC).
The Treaties do not permit harmonisation of the content of Member States' education systems.
Horizontal principles relating to national and other forms of discrimination, and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, apply to all parts of education.
The EU Court has already decided on issues of access to student subsidies and access to universities.
Links
Activities of the European Union: Education, Training and Youth http://europa.eu/pol/educ/index_en.htm
Factsheet
The Lisbon Treaty and Education, students and teachers
by Jens-Peter Bonde, former MEP and former President of the EU Democrats
Education is a so-called “coordinating competence” as clarified in the new
Art. 6 TFEU of the Lisbon Treaty. The Union can decide incentive measures
to promote joint initiatives on education. The Union has no formal competence to
harmonise national laws on education. At the same time there is no area of
education where different aspects cannot be affected by EU rules andrulings of the EU Court in Luxembourg.
The Court has defined education as a service. There is free movement of
students and teachers in the EU. Schools are not only public entities.
They work in a market and the market conditions are set by treaty
articles, interpreted and implemented by the market-oriented EU Court in
Luxembourg and by means of directives from Brussels.
It is clear that education is an obligation of every member state, but no treaty
provision can hinder the Union from establishing a joint system of
education by a decision by qualified majority. The operative competences
are provided in Arts. 165-166 TFEU. When the EU has decided on education
the EU rules have primacy over national laws and even over national
Constitutions.
The Union can also enter into international agreements on trade in
education services according to Arts. 206-207 TFEU. Trade agreements are
normally decided by qualified majority in the Council. Art. 207.4 TFEU
establishes a possible derogation by unanimity if international
agreements “risk seriously disturbing the national organisation of such
services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member States delivering
them”.
It is the non-elected Commission in Brussels which has a monopoly inproposing legislative acts, incentive measures and trade agreements. It is the Commission also which interprets whether an agreement is “seriously disturbing the national organisation” of education.
It is no longer the national parliaments that would exclusively decide educational
matters.
The EU Court has already established that secondary education is a service
according to the treaties, now covered by Arts. 56-62 TFEU of the Lisbon
Treaty. There is free movement of services.
Students are free to study at home or abroad according to the same rules as
the nationals of the states they are studying in. Foreign students from
other Member States have free access to government subsidies when they
have sojourned in the country of their studies for a certain period. The length of such periods is currently under dispute in the EU Court.
Foreign students can even claim study places in educational areas where a particular country has a big need for educating its own students.
There are special directives governing mutual recognition of educational
qualifications, which have been assembled in a new directive that entered
into force in October 2007. These directives also harmonise the content of
a wide range of educational qualifications. Previously there were special
directives for doctors, nurses, architects, dentists, pharmacists,
veterinary workers and midwives.
There are also special EU rules financing student travel abroad for
educational purposes, e.g. Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci, Socrates, Grundtvig,
and Comenius for basic schools.
The Services Directive covers education but not health. It will enter
into force fully from 2010 and will then give the Union further competences.
Amendments to this Directive were proposed to safeguard collective bargaining in the area of education, for examplenationally negotiated salaries for teachers, national tax laws and Member
States' rights to decide independently whether services should be organised
publicly and/or privately. These amendments were all rejected when the
Directive was adopted in November 2006.
Foreign companies will therefore have a free right to establish Education
Centres in another EU country, where teachers can be paid according to much lower
foreign standards.
According to the verdicts in the Viking, Laval and Rüffert cases of 11
December 2007, 18 December 2007 and 3 April 2008 respectively, it may also
be illegal for example for national Teacher Unions to take action against such lower
salaries as long as they respect the national minimum wage of the host country or when there is no collective agreement covering all employees.
It may also be illegal under EU law for goverments and local
authorities to request Education Centres to abide by normal salaries
as a condition for obtaining public financial support.
There may be many other as yet unknown consequences of accepting education as a
general service at EU level which we do not know of today. Before its adoption there were many attempts to establish the Services Directive as a clear set of rules that would protect thelaws of the Member States concerned, but they failed to obtain majority support.
A political compromise was achieved around the whole services package by
giving up on legal clarity. So it will now be up to the EU Court of Justice to
decide on many issues in relation to education, citizens’ access to
education and the salaries of teachers and income support for students.
It may be wise to think through all the consequences of the Services
Directive and its link with the Lisbon Treaty before approving new Treaty
obligations that can never be altered by citizens afterwards.
There are also unknown consequences for education and educational policy stemming from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights being made legally binding.
The effects of the Lisbon Treaty on education were discussed during the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland. Possible unwanted effects could be neutralised by a Protocol that stated, for example:
“Nothing in these treaties shall hinder the Irish Dail from establishing
its own rules for all areas of education in Ireland, for public financing of education and for allowing Ireland to have salaries in the entire educational sector that are established by collective bargaining between the social partners in Ireland.
It shall particularly be permissible for teacher unions and other unions
involved in education to act against what they regard as low salaries despite the Court cases Viking, Laval and Rüffert. The effects of these case judgements of the EU Court of Justice shall not apply in Ireland.”
Comments on this Fact-sheet are welcome. Please mail them to jp@bonde.dk
Read a Reader-Friendly version of the Lisbon Treaty here.
