Commission set for limited role on 2020 targets

With commentators largely disparaging about the new plan's chances of success, some have singled out the existence of national targets as key to helping member states take greater ownership of the initiative, and an important difference to the EU's former 10-year plan - the Lisbon Strategy.

A commission communication on the EU 2020 earlier this month suggested five EU headline targets be set, with these subsequently broken down into differentiated and measurable national targets.

Speaking at a think tank pow-wow in Brussels last week, Ann Mettler of the Lisbon Council said the existence of national targets constituted a "qualitative change" from the bloc's former plan, but warned they must be set by the commission and not national capitals.

Otherwise member states would simply pencil in low and easily achievable national targets in order to avoid rebukes in the future, she said. However its appears that EU leaders are only prepared to give the commission a more limited role - one based on "dialogue."

"In the light of the headline targets, Member States will set their national targets, taking account of their relative starting positions and national circumstances," say draft council conclusions, seen by EUobserver and dated 19 March.

"They will do so according to their national decision-making procedures, in a dialogue with the commission in order to ensure consistency with the EU headline targets," they continue.

As a result, Ms Mettler said it was highly unlikely that member states would agree to strong targets. "It's not ambitious enough, it really should be the commission setting them," she told this website.

EU targets, implementation

As well as limiting the commission's role in setting national targets, the conclusions suggest member states have yet to agree on the five EU headline targets.

A meeting of EU finance ministers in Brussels earlier this month drew a question mark over the commission's proposal for the the EU to spend three percent of its GDP on research and development.

"The council [representing member states] considers that urgent consideration should be given to a wider indicator that would reflect R&D and innovation," said the ministers, conscious of their increasingly restricted budgets. They also expressed doubts about the commission's poverty reduction target.

With business groups and MEPs calling for greater incentives for member states to reach their national targets, such as potentially offering a greater slice of EU structural fund money for those that do, the draft European Council conclusions are also noticeably lacking in any suggestions in this area.

Critics of the soon-to-expire Lisbon Strategy say its deficit of tough implementation mechanisms was the primary reason for its failure.