Labour MEP Stephen Hughes, 54, talks about
working in Brussels, the controversial European
working time directive, how it might be amended, and
how to operate in the Brussels legislative scene....
You are the British MEP most heavily involved with the European
working time directive in the European parliament.
Apparently it is now subject to possible revision.
What’s happening with it?
The EWTD stipulates a maximum average 48-hour working
week for health and safety reasons.
It also stipulates a minimum 11 hours per day rest
period.
When it was signed, in 1993, the Conservative
government in the UK secured the right of companies
across Europe to get an opt-out. In most areas of
work, employees could - only if they wanted to -
sign an agreement with their employers permitting them
to work more than that. Although the stated reason
was to give businesses flexibility and boost British
economic growth, there were several reasons why this
was unacceptable - one being the matter of whether it
was truly voluntary, since many workers were asked to
sign the opt-out at the same time as they signed their
contracts. There might be an element of invisible
coercion involved. The opt-out has been extensively
used by UK firms, less often by German, Luxembourg and
Spanish companies.
Several governments have come around to the view that
the opt-out is unacceptable
and are negotiating for it to be abolished.
There was for long a complete deadlock among the EU’s
employment ministers about this: Sweden, France,
Italy, Spain and others want the opt-out to go. The UK,
Ireland, Germany and Poland wanted to keep it.
But now things are changing; Poland has signalled it
will be changing sides, because it wants to see introduced some of
the uncontroversial provisions in the amended directive, so in the
next year I expect, with the UK and others losing their blocking
minority, the opt-out will be abolished in return for which there
will be greater flexibility in the reference period
over which the 48-hour week is calculated, from four
months to a year, a concession to economic
flexibility.
How does all this relate to doctors?
Doctors in training were brought into the provisions of the EWTD in
2004, with a phasing in period. Today they work 58 hours a week, from
2009 it will be 48 hours a week.
But doctors could still opt out on an individual basis. That loophole
will now close.
What do you say to the controversial allegations being levelled at the EWTD: that the rest requirements
of 11 hours a night impose a straight shift system
where doctors work 13 hours a day, often 7 days in a
row, with no rest in those 13 hours. That less time
spent in hospitals means they have less training under
their belt when qualifying. That a shift system means
no continuity of care, and so on....
I have talked to consultants about this. One, a few
weeks ago, said that whereas when he qualified as a
consultant it took him about two years to find his
feet, it now takes a consultant five years because he will have had
less time training in hospital up to qualification. I am
sympathetic to this argument and am happy to receive
petitions.
Are British doctors good at lobbying Brussels?
The BMA junior doctors’ committee and the Royal
College of Nursing have done some lobbying. But
generally they are not as effective as they might be.
My advice is to get into the process early, and
upstream. Find out what is going on - the commission
is now discussing proposals that haven’t seen the
light of day yet but could become law in a decade. And
that will affect doctors.
Who should they lobby?
The commission; MEPs, especially on the employment and public health
committees; doctors’ organisations in Europe,
such as the CPME. Incidentally, if you are a qualified doctor and
want to work in medical politics and in Brussels, the
CPME is a good place to start looking for a job
So when you as an MEP have been “lobbied” , what do
you do.
It is not like national politics. There is a lot of opportunity for
lobbyists to change legislation at the parliamentary level. Unlike
British backbenchers, perhaps, MEPs have great freedom in shape
legislation, able to suggest amendments that are completely at odds
with a commission’s original proposal. When we have inserted
an amendment, you have to get support from it, first
in the relevant committee and then in parliament as a
whole. You have to build cross party alliances with individuals who
support your ideas in other parties, and hope they can
deliver block votes from their side. Brussels is all about building
alliances, coalitions.
Do you get lobbied by the pharmaceutical corporations?
All the time. They have big resources, instrumental in their success
in getting their views taken into account in the recent patent
extension legislation; they overwhelm us with information; and our
own research facilities are under-resourced by comparison. We have
access to fewer researchers than the Houses of Congress. Hopefully
this will change soon.
Why should health and safety at work issues be a
European competence?
Because of the European single market: there has to be a level
playing field. It is unfair if some countries have a competitive
advantage by having their workers subjected to worse health and
safety regulations.
Isn’t there too much legislation coming from Europe?
A lot of problems come from “gold-plating” - the
adding of clauses by national civil servants when
EU directives are transposed into national law.
Britain has the second biggest health and occupational
safety manual in Europe after Germany. It is also true
that Britain is more zealous than other countries at
implementing laws - including the EWTD.
What other health and safety at work legislation is going through at the moment?
Legislation on repetitive strain injury. A ban on unsafe needles in
Hospitals. Experiments in Manchester have shown that safe needles
reduce needlestick injuries by 95 percent. Since safe needles cost
the same these days, and each needlestick injury costs health systems
thousands of pounds in compensation and time off work, it is a good
idea to introduce safe needles across Europe.
Do you enjoy Brussels, having been an MEP here for 22 years?
There is a lot of travel, but the place has a great buzz.
Even though not nearly enough people know what we do.
