Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Multilingualism
Date: 2008-09-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, continuing vocational training, language policy, language teaching, multilingualism, social integration

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/109

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Multilingualism’

(2009/C 77/25)

In a letter dated 4 February 2008, Ms Margot Wallström, Vice-President of the European Commission, asked
the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European
Community, to draw up an exploratory opinion on

Multilingualism.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 18 July 2008. The rapporteur was
Ms Le Nouail-Marlière.

At its 447th plenary session, held on 17 and 18 September 2008 (meeting of 18 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 144 votes to eight, with 13 abstentions.

Summary of the opinion and its conclusions

— Considering that this subject is growing in importance, both
in political and economic terms, the Committee regrets that
instead of putting forward a concrete programme that
follows up on the ‘New framework strategy for multilingu-
alism’ adopted in 2005, the Commission has chosen to
present a new strategy for the last part of its term of office.

— The Committee calls on the Commission and Member States
to speed up the discussion on the objectives before speci-
fying the initiatives to be pursued through coordination in
the fields of culture and education.

— Regarding the choice of the first foreign language taught and
learnt, it encourages the Member States and the Commission
to
than
Anglo-American English, and to promote the learning and
use of European languages in extra-Community exchanges.

languages

promote

choice

other

the

of

the

close

correlation between
— The Committee notes
European citizens'
language needs, the European employ-
ment strategy, and the convergence objectives pursued by
the EU Structural Funds, in particular the Cohesion Fund. It
therefore calls on them to use these funds to help people to
improve their command of their mother tongue, as well as
two additional
living languages, and even to make this a
priority in the use of the funds. It adds that this objective
should comprise two qualitative aims: to preserve the vitality
of European languages, and to diversify knowledge of
languages to include non-Community languages that are
useful for the cultural, social, political and economic rela-
tions that Europeans engage in, as they help to promote
knowledge of other cultures, as well as peace and friendship
between peoples.

— Noting that little is being done for the people who have the
least prospect of finding declared work with proper social

protection, or for those who live a long way from urban or
tourist centres, the Committee calls on the Commission and
Member States to make sure that the initiatives they under-
take do not lead to discrimination and differences in treat-
ment, nor to further exclusion and thus renewed frustration.
In order to achieve this, it advises them to consult the social
partners and civil society organisations actively engaged in
that area.

— Given that the Commission is keen to conduct a consulta-
tion among its internal departments, the measures recom-
mended should take into account the context of improve-
to jeopardise SME
ments to regulations,
competitiveness.

in order not

— The Commission and Member States should endeavour to
evaluate both informal and formal learning undertaken, as
part of the European certification system, in order to be able
to assess its value and facilitate the transfer and recognition
of qualifications for individuals and employees alike, what-
ever their status.

— In the context of social consultation the Committee also
calls on the Member States and the Commission to provide
support
for language-based professions such as teachers,
translators and interpreters so that the official languages can
be used more fully in public communication. It points out
that needs have not yet been adequately met, either here or
in the business field.

1. Introduction

On 6 September 2006, shortly before the creation of a new
Commission portfolio on multilingualism and intercultural
dialogue and the appointment of Commissioner Leonard Orban,
the EESC adopted an opinion on a ‘new framework strategy for
multilingualism’ (1).

(1) EESC opinion of 26.10.2006 on the Communication from the
the
Commission to the Council,
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions — A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism; rapporteur:
Ms Le Nouail-Marlière (OJ C 324 of 30.12.2006).

the European Parliament,

C 77/110

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

Some time later, on 25 October 2007,
the Commissioner
attended the Committee plenary session, on the invitation of the
EESC president, Mr Dimitriadis, and expressed his interest in the
Committee's work.

— multilingualism in the professional, cultural, political, scientific and

social fields should be developed and promoted;

In the light of his plan to present a new strategy in this area, the
Commissioner asked the Committee to draft an exploratory
opinion.

— the experts involved in this work should be drawn not just from
the ranks of specialists in social and scientific disciplines but should
also include linguists,
interpreters, translators, teachers and
other language professionals;

The Committee therefore proposes to:

— assess the follow-up to the previous Commission strategy

and the recommendations it made at that time;

— sum up the measures taken by the Commission;

— respond in the more general context of the broad public
consultation organised by the Commission and the hearing
of 15 April 2008, in time for the Commission to take its
recommendations into account in the communication due
to be published in September 2008.

2. General comments

2.1
The Committee notes that this subject is growing daily in
importance, not because it is currently fashionable, but because
of the very real context of globalisation, bringing together an
ever increasing number and range of players. New situations call
for new solutions and responses. The world is changing in the
economic and technical fields, as well as socially, politically,
culturally and in terms of public life. Certain ever-present or
long-standing phenomena are now growing in intensity and
visibility, even becoming critical.

In very diverse areas, at work and in business dealings, in
2.2
leisure and tourism, the cultural dimension is moving in ways
that the EESC must attempt to understand from all angles, so as
to understand the concerns of our fellow citizens and make
practical and intelligent suggestions to the institutions, in par-
ticular by taking part in consultations and triggering debates.

The diversity and rich variety of opinions demonstrate the
interest European citizens have in this issue, reflecting their
shared humanity.

In its above-mentioned opinion, the Committee recom-

2.3
mended that:

— ‘the Commission should give the Member States precise indi-
cations about the links which could be established and additional
measures which could be taken in the national plans, stressing
that multilingualism or plurilingualism can help to promote
cultural and political integration, and foster understanding
and social inclusion;

— in order to achieve long-term results, the language training on
offer needs to be coordinated at EU level, with the potential
pool of language skills spanning a wide range of languages;

— greater account be taken of today's young and older adult
generation in developing this action, via life-long learning
and, when the Commission reaches the programming stage,
through their cultural rights;

— the Commission not only draws on university research but
also on the work carried out by the networks of associations
working in this area, and that it supports the grassroots
initiatives taken within the civil society network’.

2.4
Overall, the EESC pointed out the need to involve as
many people as possible in these language learning, practice and
skill strategies and to find realistic means of achieving that. It
warned against creating new forms of social discrimination. It
called for thinking to include the full range of languages avail-
able, so that the EU would not become constrained by language,
cultural and economic barriers.
It recommended striking a
balance between economic, cultural and public interests, and
working hard to catch up in the area of employment and work.

2.5
The Committee also recalled that language and cultural
areas had evolved alongside political and economic groupings in
the world, and that unfortunately the tendency for certain
languages to become extinct went hand in hand with the assimi-
lation or disappearance of certain social or political groups.
Europe faces the same challenges as other world regions: firstly,
the tendency for one language to dominate transnational rela-
tions, and, secondly, a diverse range of regional languages and
the same threat that certain languages may disappear. One key
difference, however, is the status of official national languages
within this unified political and economic grouping (just how
unified it is depends on one's opinion on EU integration).

2.6
Although the EU would face the same identity crisis irre-
spective of its cultural and linguistic approach, the integration
process has developed certain plus-points: for instance instru-
ments to promote social and territorial cohesion, common
criteria for
representative and participatory democracy, and
social models founded on a degree of solidarity.

2.7
Nevertheless, demographic challenges and cultural inter-
ests when combined can raise a number of major issues, that
must not be sidestepped: what interest do Europeans have in
their own languages, in sharing them, preserving them, bringing
them alive and not letting them die, in other words in speaking
them among themselves and with others?

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/111

3. Specific comments

The Commission began a public consultation process on
3.1
14 September 2007, which ended on 15 April 2008 with a
conference during which it presented various findings to a
number of associations and organisations active in culture or
education, garnered from the following sources:

tionate to the requirements of the job, as well as the safety
issues that a badly managed or unmanaged multilingual
environment could give rise to.

3.3 The Commission's general objectives
diversity, presented during the hearing

for promoting linguistic

— The Group of Intellectuals chaired by Mr Amin Maalouf

3.3.1
not enough)

Diversifying language skills within the EU (English is

— The ‘Business Forum’, chaired by Mr Davignon

— The ‘ELAN Report: Effects on the European Union Economy
of Shortages of Foreign Language Skills in Enterprise’, by the
National Centre for Languages, UK

The aim of Multilingualism Commissioner, Leonard Orban, as
stated during his speech at this hearing and on other occasions,
is clearly to attempt to reverse the trend towards ‘English only’.

— Formal consultation of the Committees (CoR and EESC)

3.3.2

In the social field:

— Consultation of the Member States: Ministerial Conference,

— underlining the role of languages in social cohesion;

February 2008

— Recommendations
Multilingualism

of

the High

Level Group

on

— Contributions received via the on-line consultation.

A number of challenges were mentioned during the

3.2
discussions:

— Economic challenges

— Political challenges (multilingualism and regional integration)

— Challenges in the cultural domain (multilingualism and

interculturalism)

— Personal and collective communication can lead one to
consider that language is just one more communication
tool. What future for literature?

— Multilingualism and plurilingualism:

it necessary for
people to be plurilingual in a language environment that is
becoming monolingual?

is

— The Council of Europe has stressed the need to protect
to
diversity

minority languages and facilitate their use,
combat nationalism: multilingualism serving
should not present a danger of exclusion.

in order

— A large number of participants mentioned frustration and
inequality in the area of languages, European languages up
against each other in the EU and the world, contrasting
national cultural policies.

— Cultural

and social
resources would be available for

rights? Many participants
rights
wondered what
such
commitments. Reference was made to the special case of the
Roma, their integration in general and the possibility of
learning and preserving their language in particular.

— The right to work in one's own language at work without
having to acquire a level of knowledge which is dispropor-

— facilitating migrant integration, encouraging them to learn
their host country's language, encouraging them to use, and
preserve their mother tongue and pass it on to their descen-
dants, and treating migrants' languages as a resource and a
source of enrichment.

3.3.3

In the economic field:

— developing language skills with a view to improving
companies'

employment

prospects

and

workers'
competitiveness;

— weaving a multilingualism strand into all European policies,

starting with a survey (inventory).

3.3.4 Multilingualism and EU foreign policy:

The Commission confirms the ‘Barcelona objective’, namely the
decision to promote knowledge by every citizen of their mother
tongue plus two modern languages, and goes one step further
to specify the mother tongue plus one international language
and one personal ‘adoptive’ language (a concept inspired by the
report from the group chaired by Mr Amin Maalouf).

3.3.5 Ways and means:

The Commission wants to promote the informal
‘business
literacy system’, which facilitates comprehension and ease of
access, but has provided few details. According to the Commis-
sion, it means exposing European citizens to elements of foreign
languages for instance in buses or other public places and
involves learning by ‘familiarisation’.

3.3.6

Concerning the future:

The Commission hopes to use structural cooperation in the
context of a medium-term strategic framework between the
Member States and to bring European value added to the devel-
opment of this policy.

C 77/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

3.4 ELAN Report (2)

The ELAN Report explores the benefits for businesses of having
a multilingual, skilled workforce. However, it does not give a
typology of needs according to jobs and positions held, or by
economic sector. The Commission ought to ask the European
Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Condi-
tions, based in Dublin, (or another European organisation) to
produce a more detailed typology of the vocational needs of
both companies and workers.

3.4.1
Report
Mr Davignon (3)

from the

Business

Forum chaired

by

This report, published at the end of June 2008, shows why
from the point of view of the Business Forum it is important to
invest in language skills. It sums up what has already been done
to promote languages in business and makes recommendations
to businesses on how to improve their performance in the area
of multilingual business communication,
they
should:
take stock of existing language skills within the
company; revise recruitment policies and development strategies
within HR management;
invest in language training; employ
native speakers of different languages; use language technology
and work with translators,
interpreters, communicators and
cultural mediators; and enhance international mobility for staff.
The report also addresses recommendations to Europe and its
institutions and to local, regional and national governments. It
argues in favour of multilingualism.

stating that

3.5 Report by Mr Amin Maalouf's group (4)

approves

the Commission's

The Committee
initiative of
consulting a group of distinguished intellectuals, whose report
was described by the group's representative at the hearing on
15 April as ‘probably the best written and easiest to read of all
the Commission reports ever produced’, which is true in some
ways. It puts forward the idea of
learning one international
language and one ‘personal adoptive language’, in other words a
language which one learns out of personal interest rather than
for economic reasons. Although a bold recognition of the role
of
languages as vectors in culture and communication, this
assumes that everyone is equally interested in languages and has
the time to devote to them, which is by no means the case, for
cultural reasons but also because the majority of European citi-
zens cannot afford to engage in what Pierre Bourdieu has
defined as the requisite cultural practices.

It is true, for example, that a growing number of Europeans, or
at
least young Europeans, see the point of speaking living
foreign languages, both European and non-European, but a

(2) ELAN report:

‘Effects on the European Economy of Shortages of

Foreign Language Skills in Enterprise’, at
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/doc/elan_en.pdf.

(3) Business Forum report at

http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/news/news1669_en.htm.

(4) Report by the Group of

Intellectuals for Intercultural Dialogue,
chaired by Mr Amin Maalouf: ‘A rewarding challenge. How the multi-
plicity of languages could strengthen Europe’, at
http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/pdf/doc1646_en.pdf.

growing number are also experiencing ever greater difficulties in
making a living and raising their children. Without reducing
everything to the class struggle, it remains a fact that European
society is segmented and the cohesion funds should be used for
example to help attain the Lisbon objectives.

The potential contribution of adult education and Grundtvig
programmes, as well as lifelong learning, should be evaluated
and calculated during discussions between the Commission
departments, before being presented to the Member States, the
Council and Parliament. This would ensure a European added
value to complement
the Member States' responsibility for
education.

The Committee notes that this does not solve the question of
the choice of English as the leading living language, apart from
leaving it entirely up to the Member States and parents, and that
the Commission does not properly raise the issue for debate.
is all very well, but it remains the
‘English is not enough’
language accepted by the EU for international communication.
The proposal is a start, not a solution. The Committee would
draw the attention of the Commission, the Member States, the
Council and the European Parliament to this point.

3.6 CoR draft opinion (5)

The CoR's opinion concluded that the language issue was of the
highest importance for local and regional authorities because it
affected not only issues of employment but also the coexistence
of Europeans and non-Europeans at all levels of society and in
all economic sectors, from health (‘labour shortages’) to tourism,
and including personal services, education in schools and at pre-
school level, and the integration of migrants. It is also a crucial
factor in the life of a growing number of regions. The CoR
rightly called for cohesion funds to be used and wished to be
consulted ahead of any strategic decisions.

3.7 Commission report on the implementation of the Action Plan

‘Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity’ (6)

The Committee fears that denying the need to allocate European
funding will lead to inertia, or a succession of measures that
bears no relation to the evolving needs, and that the result will
be disappointing in the medium and long term. The Committee
calls on the Member States to think about this: television is not
enough and informal
learning has to be measurable. The
Committee acknowledges that the coordination method chosen
by the Commission would be a step forward administratively,
but would not necessarily bring it any closer to the citizen.

(5) Committee of the Regions opinion on multilingualism; rapporteur

Mr Roberto Pella (CdR 6/2008).

(6) COM(2007) 554 final/2 of 15.11.2007.

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/113

4. Conclusions

4.1
The Committee believes that, while obviously well-inten-
tioned, the Commission is merely rehearsing the arguments and
is not proposing any substantial action by the European Union
beyond urging the Member States to adapt their educational
systems.

4.2
The Committee recommends that the Member States
continue the approach that takes into account diversifica-
tion into languages of international communication other
than English.

The Member States should continue to promote
4.3
local
(whether in linguistic or geographical terms) and
family ties in the European languages they offer at all levels
of education: nursery, primary, secondary, higher and life-
long learning, ensuring diversity.

Adult education, as envisaged by the Commission (7),
4.4
should take into account the need to get more people
involved in the effort required to meet
the target of
learning two living languages in addition to their mother
tongue, by adapting the supply and stimulating people's
interest and motivation by practical measures at local level,
by drawing on the expertise of civil society organisations
on the ground and professionals in the public and private
sector, by promoting social and civil dialogue, and by
ensuring that new initiatives do not create unfair discrimi-
nation between citizens with limited access to intercultural
exchange.

The democratisation and informal learning advocated by
4.5
the Commission should be carefully evaluated as part of the
European certification system, in order to:

— measure the impact of the actions taken by the Member
States, the Commission and the other governmental and
non-governmental bodies involved;

— ensure the transfer and recognition of qualifications for citi-

zens and employees, whatever their status.

4.6
Local and regional authorities should have a practical
role in developing the educational provision of the future
that is commensurate with the Commission's ambitions.

Given that companies and employees are directly affected
4.7
by the Commission's conclusions relating to firms' economic
needs, the Member States and the Commission should encou-
rage the social partners to raise the issue in the social
dialogue in order to discuss the problems together and find
the best solutions and appropriate practices.

(7) See, for example, COM(2006) 614 final and COM(2007) 558 final.

4.8
Immersion in the living language environment,
which is necessary for speaking a language and an integral
part of consolidated learning, must be allowed and encour-
levels and for all social groups. The need is
aged at all
perhaps particularly acute for those social groups least
exposed to transnational exchanges, i.e. those who are least
mobile, and practical means and resources must be found for
them. Nobody can be forced to travel, but some people have
fewer resources than others. English is not enough, nor is
television.

4.9
In the case of the languages spoken by migrants, it is
important to stress that these constitute a valuable resource.
thought here. Some
There are several different schools of
believe that migrants have a duty to learn the language of the
host country in order to integrate or even to enter EU territory,
while others believe that migrants have the right to learn the
language of their host country in order to be able to work, live
and defend their rights there and that the authorities have a
responsibility to organise language teaching. Either way, there is
a big gap between theory and practice. Experience shows that
best practices have not always been promoted and, on the
contrary, many associations have had their grants cut. The
educational challenge is now enormous, because people do not
learn in the same way at different ages. In this connection the
research into the intercultural
Committee
language learning (8). The
exchange that underlies all
Committee stresses the need to consult and involve profes-
sionals in the field of education from nursery education to life-
long learning, including adult education. The two parties most
closely concerned are students and teachers. This also applies to
the future validation of informal skills (9).

recommends

4.10
The languages spoken in Europe comprise the regional
and national languages and the languages spoken by migrants.
They make a major contribution, and the management of
cultural diversity in Europe will be characterised by two chal-
lenges: promoting European cultural diversity, and tolerance and
respect for migrants. EU social and territorial cohesion is no
longer just a matter of economics or politics;
in future (and
already today)
is inextricably bound up with its cultural
dimension.

it

4.11
Like the languages that are native to Europe, the
languages of migrants should be passed on to their descen-
dants, and as no language can survive without being
spoken, migrants should also be seen as resources for
transmitting or teaching their native language to those who
want to diversify their communication skills.

(8) See http://www.newcomersinturkey.com — Mr Noureddine Erradi has
worked for many years
in
the Netherlands and has produced educational tools for trainers and
policy advisers in local and regional agencies and authorities.

training centres

for migrants

for

the European Parliament and of

(9) SOC Section opinion of 11.9.2008 on the Proposal for a Recommen-
the Council on the
dation of
establishment of the European credit system for vocational education
and
Le Nouail-Marlière
training
(CESE 1066/2008).

rapporteur: Ms

(ECVET),

C 77/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

4.12
This means that civil society in Europe today has other
aspirations and it is not enough to preach the benefits of being
plurilingual
in a multilingual environment; civil society will
want its own initiatives within associations to be recognised, its
needs to be acknowledged and, in all cases, adequate resources
to succeed, whether of public or private origin.

4.13
This also means that the social partners must agree
to take the long-term view and jointly decide on the quali-
fications required,
the types of education and lifelong
learning to be provided, and the public and private invest-
ment to be considered, while taking care to improve busi-
ness competitiveness.

If

4.14
language learning is also regarded as essential for
competitiveness and for meeting the Lisbon Strategy targets, the
above recommendation becomes particularly compelling.

Articles 21 and 22 of

the Charter of Fundamental
4.15
Rights promote linguistic diversity and prohibit discrimination
on grounds of language. The Commission should determine
which Member States have legislation on the subject, refer-
ring cases to the Fundamental Rights Agency if necessary,
and examine whether the fact that Member States apply
different systems creates distortions and unequal treatment
between Europeans, particularly as
regards mobility,
recruitment, etc. A distinction should be made between two
levels that are relevant here: the degree of linguistic knowledge
needed to perform the job-related tasks (contact with members
of the public or clients who are foreign), and the communica-
tion of the instructions necessary for carrying out the tasks in
the language of the person performing them.

As regards the implementation of this in particular, the
4.16
Committee will look carefully at what the Commission proposes
in the strategy it is due to present in September 2008 and the
progress compared with its previous strategy.

rights of European
4.17
citizens and non-European residents and the EU's external

On the matter of

the cultural

Brussels, 18 September 2008.

cooperation the Commission should perhaps draw on the
UNESCO convention on diversity and propose guidelines
identifying the consequences for Europe of its ratification
by the Member States, working with associations and
NGOs that are already active in the field of culture.

4.18 Mobility is promoted by the social partners and hailed
by a number of employers, workers and public authorities,
including the Commission, as a panacea for unemployment and
labour shortages. Linguistic obstacles still receive too little atten-
tion. One such obstacle is the difficulty, in the context of life-
long learning, of pursuing both vocational
training and
achieving set language objectives; another is parents' inability to
enrol their children in the school of their choice when they
move around for work, e.g. in the case of the Roma in various
European countries or some groups of Italians in Germany. The
Commission should not just leave it up to the Member States,
information about discrimination on
but
linguistic grounds between children of different European
nationalities in schools.

should request

4.19 Mention should also be made of the difficulties encoun-
tered by Member State administrations in applying the directive
on the posting of workers. The social partners have also experi-
enced problems of comprehension on the ground, which the
Commission is aware of but which need to be properly
discussed by the parties concerned (Commission, Member
States, social partners,
local and national authorities, employ-
ment services, etc.), as discussed above (10).

4.20
Finally, more thought should be given to the language
regime of the Community institutions as it applies to docu-
ments other
than official communications. The Committee
notes that this is still a difficult issue because many public docu-
ments are not
translated, raising yet again the question of
resources. One obvious example is the web pages that follow
in particular
the European Institutions' website homepages,
those of the European Council and the EU presidency.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(10) EESC opinion of 29.5.2008 on the Posting of workers in the frame-
work of the provision of services — Maximising its benefits and poten-
tial while guaranteeing the protection of workers,
rapporteur:
Ms Le Nouail-Marlière (OJ C 224, 30.8.2008).