Press release: EAPN response to the ‘renewed Lisbon Strategy’: The dropping of Social Cohesion is incomprehensible!
The Commission’s Communication to the European Spring Council has caused shock and dismay amongst social NGOs, including EAPN.
The Commission’s Communication to the European Spring Council has caused shock and dismay amongst social NGOs, including EAPN.
“If the Council ignores the realities faced by the 68 million people living in poverty in the EU, the objective to combat social exclusion stated in Article 3 of the new EU Constitution is anything more than nice words”, writes Fintan Farrell, Director of EAPN, in an open letter sent today to the Heads of State and Government.
On the occasion of a preparatory meeting for the World Summit for Social Development Review, organised in Brussels on 13-14 January 2005, EAPN has sent a series of messages about reality and progress in the European Union in the field of social development.
In the final declaration of its 2004 General Assembly, EAPN states: "Diversity in social models in the enlarged EU might be used as an excuse to seek a less social Europe and to view enlargement primarily as an economic and internal market project."
According to EAPN, the Kok report fails to grapple with the complexity of the Lisbon Agenda, and ignores the commitment made in Lisbon in March 2000 in relation to the eradication of poverty and social exclusion.
The European Round Table “Social inclusion in an enlarged EU: new challenges, new opportunities” takes place in Rotterdam on 17-19 October. On that occasion, EAPN publishes a series of position papers to promote an Inclusion Strategy which should be far more than a paper exercise…
With the European Parliament and Commission busy reshaping themselves, the outcome of the Kok High Level Group to Review the Lisbon strategy will take on even greater impor
At the occasion of a seminar entitled “Social Services of General Interest in the European Union", EAPN wants to put the needs and expectations of people experiencing poverty and social exclusion at the centre of the debate.