The Directive on services in the internal market (commonly referred to as the Bolkestein Directive) is an initiative of the European Commission (EC) aimed at creating a single market for services within the European Union (EU), similar to the single market for goods already present.

I believe the proposed legislation need not have been amended. The proposal already contained a clause protecting essential services(referred to as services of general interest (SGI)) and in my opinion no other exceptions where necessary.

I will briefly describe the discussion, point out the major flaw in the argumentation against the directive and finish with my conclusion.

The Polish plumber

The major discussion against the directive is nicknamed the Polish Plumber (used as an example of cheap Polish labour). This expression is a result of the debate around social dumping. Social dumping is the relocation of work from the local workforce to the workforce from cheaper labour countries. Social dumping is a global phenomena but the debate against the directive is focused on social dumping within the EU. The solution, opponents of the directive came up with, is mainly applicable on services which have to be performed physically on location.

For me, this discussion is proof of the short sightedness of a large number of politicians. It is short sighted in two ways:

• It does not face reality
• It does not solve the underlying problem

Not facing reality

The phenomena of social dumping is older than the EU, legislation can probably hinder it, but not prevent it. In areas where services require physical presence on location, you might be able to slow the transition to cheaper labour down. But under those circumstances it will generally move into illegality. In areas where physical presence is of no concern, the process is unstoppable (outsourcing IT for instance). People who think you can halt transition of work to cheaper labour locations or think you can stop cheap labour from moving in (with open borders), are not facing reality.   

Not solving the underlying problem

All the fear and all the opposition against the Bolkestein Directive is based on the fear that it would lead to competition between workers in different parts of Europe. Apart from the fact that in the area of digital services this competition already exists on a global scale, it is also the wrong problem to address.
The real problem which should be addressed; is the problem of social inequality between the member states. This is where I think the left wing opposition missed a great opportunity, the opportunity to demand an extensive social directive as a condition to open our internal market any further. 

My conclusion

The Bolkestein Directive should have been the next step towards a common market. Rejecting it and amending it did not and will not achieve the goal of protecting the local workforce. The left wing protectionism narrowed their focus so much, they missed the opportunity to introduce a social chapter. Europe needs a more explicit social chapter. This was an opportunity to work towards it. Instead of coming up with a constructive solution to a more united and unified Europe, we ended up with a compromise nobody really likes.

We all lost.