Foreword

Summary

With some 16% of its population at risk of poverty, one of the most important challenges that continues to face the European Union (EU) is the need to achieve a significant reduction in the level of poverty and social exclusion. This is not a new challenge. Since the March 2000 European Council in Lisbon the EU has been committed to taking steps “to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty” (Presidency Conclusions). The EU Social Inclusion Process, the Open Method of Coordination on poverty and social exclusion, has been the means used to achieve this objective.

This Social Inclusion Process is of great importance. Given that more than a quarter of those who are at risk of poverty are at work, it is clear that there is no automatic link between more jobs and a reduction in poverty. Furthermore, access to a job is not a realistic solution for many of those who are living in poverty and are outside the labour market. Thus it is essential that we accompany our efforts to promote growth and jobs with strong social inclusion policies.

In 2005, after five years of the EU Social Inclusion Process, Member States and the European Commission agreed it would be timely to review the effectiveness of the Process with a view to making proposals for its further strengthening and to ensuring a greater coordination with the other social “processes” launched in the context of what has become known as the Lisbon Strategy – the Pensions Process and the Health Care and Long-Term Care Process. The Luxembourg Government strongly supported the need for such a review. It thus decided that making a significant contribution to this mid-term review of the social processes launched at Lisbon would be a key priority for its Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

A particular concern of my Government was that the effectiveness of the Social Inclusion Process had been limited, both in Luxembourg but also in the Union more generally, by a lack of consistent monitoring and evaluation of the Process. Indeed, the need for Member States to enhance social monitoring of national performance had already been highlighted in the Conclusions of the Spring European Council in 2004.