Saturday, 13 May 2017

European Semester 2017 start: Denmark

Last autumn the European Commission launched the European Semester 2017 by publishing the:
Annual Growth Survey 2017; Brussels, 16.11.2016 COM(2016) 725 final (16 pages)

The Annual Growth Survey (AGS) offered a summary of the Commission’s priorities at EU level and the need for action at the national level in order to promote investment, structural reforms and responsible public finances in 2017 and beyond. However, the AGS did not mention individual countries.

Against the broad AGS background, the Commission analysed individual member states in the:
Alert Mechanism Report 2017; Brussels, 16.11.2016 COM(2016) 728 final (47 pages)    

A summary of Denmark is presented on the pages 26-27 of the Alert Mechanism Report (AMR) 2017, with the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP) at least postponed:   

Overall, the economic reading points to possible issues related to private debt and the housing sector, but risks still appear contained. Therefore, the Commission will at this stage not carry out further in-depth analysis in the context of the MIP.

The AGS was accompanied by the mandatory:
Draft Joint Employment Report; Brussels, 16.11.2016 COM(2016) 729 final (83 pages)

Flexicurity being almost a trademark of Denmark, Danish representatives probably saw it as indirect praise, when the draft Joint Employment Report (JER) underlined that reforms promoting resilient and inclusive labour markets must continue in the European Union countries, stimulating job creation and labour market participation while properly combining flexibility and adequate security (page 3).

But the youth unemployment rate and the rate of thosen not in employment, education or training (NEET rate) had risen in Denmark (p. 17). In the summary of the scoreboard of key employment and social indicators (p. 18) Denmark performed better than average regarding the unemployment rate, the at-risk-of-poverty rate, inequality (S80/S20 =  the ratio between the incomes of the 20% of the population with the highest incomes and the incomes of the 20% with lowest incomes) and was among the best performers with regard to gross disposable household income.


Ralf Grahn