by Giles Merritt
There’s a fresh spring in Brussels’ step after Hungary’s landslide rejection of Viktor Orbán. That shouldn’t delude us, though. The European Union’s shambling pace on its vital Single Market project has not picked up speed.
The EU’s fortunes have been mixed since Donald Trump’s return to the White House almost 15 months ago. His tariffs and last summer’s humiliating US-EU Turnberry trade deal were a low point, but since then the barrage of anti-European tirades and insults, and the plain illegality of Trump’s policies, have seen a closing of ranks across Europe.
Of all Washington’s taunts there was one, however, that really stung. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s jibe about “the dreaded EU working group” touched a raw nerve. The ponderous nature of consensus-making is a weakness that everyone acknowledges but nobody seems able to cure.
The bureaucratic and political roadblocks that slow reforms to a snail’s pace make a dismally long list. Optimists insist that Europe can regain its global industrial competitiveness with tough measures. But demolishing barriers in areas like financial services and energy is proving hard. EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has, perhaps rashly, tried to spur the process by announcing a 2028 deadline.
The reforms strategy stems from hard-hitting analyses by two former Italian prime ministers, Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi, of the EU Single Market’s fragmented nature 35 years after its ‘completion’ in 1992. Both have repeatedly voiced concerns that progress is far too slow. The ultra-discreet European Central Bank has just joined the fray, calling on squabbling eurozone governments – most notably Germany’s – to end the roadblock on a key element of banking union.
The scale of the EU’s stumbling has also been highlighted by a third former Italian PM, Mario Monti. In February, he excoriated the ‘hypocrisy’ of short-sighted national politicians and corporate leaders seeking their protection. Monti knows what he’s talking about because 16 years ago he himself launched an ill-fated 12-point plan to reinvigorate the Single Market.
A strong sense of déjà vu hangs over the struggle to streamline Europe’s flagging economy. Although presented as novel, the Commission’s much-hyped ’28th regime’, a corporate rulebook to override national red tape, in fact has a venerable history; it was first proposed in 1988 and became available in an earlier form in 2004.
None of this is to downplay the importance of the Draghi and Letta initiatives. Rather it’s to point out the jungle of obstructions and delays they must hack through.
Brussels’ efforts to ‘sell’ to public opinion its renewed attack on intra-EU protectionism have so far failed. Research by the European Parliament promises a massive €2.8tn economic boost by 2032 if the reforms are introduced, although this bonanza has excited little media interest.
A variety of sub-schemes are put forward to buttress the ‘mega-market’, but have yet to take off. Some experts urge the abandoning of EU directives that member states apply as they see fit. Instead, they want to resort to regulations that impose the same rules on all. Others believe the commission should use fines and court actions against member states that flout Single Market disciplines.
Another approach is that backed by Antonio Costa, former Portuguese prime minister who since 2024 has shone as president of the European Council. Costa wants to slash red tape far more aggressively, saying that this “could be a big bang in the internal market”.
A more concerted approach is the ‘Buy European’ initiative championed by France. It’s along the lines of an industrial policy for the EU so beloved by the French. Even though it aims at concerting member states, it has so far done much to divide them.
Germany’s major corporations suspect that labelling goods as ‘Made in Europe’ would blunt their cutting edge in advanced engineering. Politicians elsewhere worry that such a clearly protectionist device would backfire. Sweden’s premier Ulf Kristersson has warned against limiting trade with other markets, saying “I’m very sceptical”.
Although different, these ideas for giving teeth to the Draghi/Letta reforms have one thing in common. They raise the question of whether the Commission should ‘name and shame’ recalcitrant member governments.
Brussels insiders often argue that the EU’s complex and politically sensitive process of decision-taking relies on trust, and that means behind-closed-doors deal-making. This would certainly explain the still very fuzzy picture journalists have of the positions on Single Market reforms taken by various member states and major corporations.
If it is not to lose momentum, the reform drive needs two things: transparency and urgency. Jacques Delors’ success in achieving his ground-breaking single market programme relied partly on its much-publicised countdown to 1992, and crucially on the scorecard that showed which member governments were on track with their parliamentary ratifications.
The Commission likes to project all manner of activities onto the facade of its Berlaymont HQ. A more permanent feature could be a large clock that counts down to Von der Leyen’s 2028 deadline, accompanied by read-outs detailing breakthroughs and breakdowns of specific negotiations.
Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi would probably agree that their project’s technical nature has meant it suffers from being out of sight, so in public terms it’s out of mind. A dazzling light show on the side of the Berlaymont could work wonders – it’s a favoured spot for TV journalists when ‘on camera’.
*Published first on Friends of Europe
By: N. Peter Kramer
