Conference of Education and Research Committee Chairpersons of the
Parliaments of the Member States of the EU, the European Parliament and
the Parliaments of the Candidate States at the Bundestag

Berlin, 11 June 2007

Honourable members,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I would like to thank the organisers for their kind invitation to this conference. I
was happy to accept because it provides an opportunity to discuss education in
Europe from an angle that deserves more attention.
As you know, the Treaty of Rome states quite clearly that the content and
organisation of education and training systems are the responsibility of Member
States. However, the fact is that the Treaty has articles on education and
training, and that cooperation in there areas at EU level brings great added
value. Indeed, in the era of globalisation, I would say it is essential.
Given the general interests of the audience today, and given the fact that
European cooperation, is most extensive in the higher education sector – just
think of the Bologna Process – it is here that I would like to concentrate my
remarks.
I said that this conference gives us a chance to discuss European aspects of
education and research from an angle that is often neglected. I feel that the
unique point of view of parliaments would complete our policy debate. You are
ideally placed to see how education policies affect people’s lives: you talk to
your constituents; you receive their letters of complaint and their demands.
Policy decisions for schools, universities and training institutions have
implications that involve almost every aspect of our economic and social reality.
For this reason alone, it is crucial that the voice of elected representatives is
heard and that your debate takes place in a European context.
Why do I insist that the future of our higher education and research is best
planned in a European context? Because these are fields in which the wind of
internationalisation is blowing ever stronger.
It is quite common today for bright young researchers to go to the internet and
pick the institutions where they will further their education, carry out their
research, or apply for teaching positions.
It is also not uncommon for these intellectual workers to regard the world as
their playground. I like this attitude immensely. It makes me think of the
travelling scholars that are so characteristic of Europe’s intellectual and
scientific past. Erasmus was one of them—and, as you know, our best–known
programme is named after him.
However, our systems of education cannot simply watch the world change
around them. They need to lead the change. Specifically, education and research
authorities in Europe need to work as a team.

---

Having been in this job for 2 and a half years now, I think I can say that all EU
countries now agree that the quality of education and training, in particular in
science and technology, is a key ingredient for the long–term success of the
Union—both in social and in economic terms – and that European level
cooperation is needed to achieve this.
One response of governments and universities to this challenge has been the
effort to build a genuine European Higher Education Area: this is the goal and
purpose of the policies and reforms known as the Bologna process.

The process has specific targets and deadline. The Area should be operation by
2010 and its main objectives – apart from the introduction of the three cycle
system of course – include free movement of students and teachers, reliable
qualifications frameworks and credit systems, and effective systems of quality
assurance.

I would like to point out that, although the specific policies look quite technical,
the EHEA is more than an ‘internal market’ for Europe’s scholars, intellectual
and researchers.

While the Area takes shape and becomes stronger, Europe’s higher education
has a golden opportunity to grow and diversify. In short, to regain world
leadership.

Just consider the implications of the quality–assurance systems that are being
put in place as we speak. A network of reliable, internal and external systems are
emerging in all European countries. Ministers of the 46 European countries in
the Bologna Process met in London last month and, amongst other decisions
taken, adopted a European Register of Quality Assurance Agencies.
But the quality labels that institutions and programmes will be awarded are
much more than administrative documents. They will have a cascading impact
on the academic landscape because—among other things—students will be able
to use them to choose their university.

I think this is important because it makes institutions more transparent and
responsible and, above all, because it ultimately empowers students ahead of
one of the most momentous choices in their lives.
Quality labels will have an impact at the opposite end of study courses as well.
Prospective employers will use them as additional information on the kind and
quality of qualifications of a job applicant.

Obviously, both of these effects will mean that universities will have to become
more competitive.
These are just some of the potential consequences of the development of quality
assurance systems. To turn this potential into reality, however, a great deal of
work remains to be done.

For instance, universities’ websites will have to describe in detail all study
programmes, indicating learning outcomes and the level and kind of
accreditation or certification won by the programme or institution.
I regard this as a major innovation that will give academic and government
authorities invaluable data that they can use in their effort to improve output and
performance.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The drive to modernise Europe’s higher education has already achieved good
results in the past few years. However, there is no room for complacency.
It seems to me that the Bologna process is a huge structural success; that is to
say, a success for the national and regional authorities that are in charge of
higher–education systems.

However, the picture does not look as rosy at the level of individual institutions.
These large–scale reforms have still to trickle down to improve the daily life of
teachers, students and researchers, to be implemented at the grass roots level.
Higher education is still suffering from uniformity of programmes offered,
over–regulation and under–funding.

I call on government and academic authorities to turn the structural changes
made possible by the Bologna process into bolder and more tangible reforms.

I am not the only one to notice this implementation gap. For example, the report
presented by the European University Association to Ministers in London last
month confirmed that many universities still find it hard to grasp the concept of
lifelong learning and to make full use of its opportunities.

Their analysis, which the European Commission shares, is as follows. These are
times of demographic change. In the future, higher education institutions will
receive fewer students who enrol directly from school. Instead, the number of
older people who need to upgrade their skills will grow.

This is a consequence of both globalisation and demographic change. It is a fact
of life. However, learning institutions should not see it as a threat, but as an
opportunity to develop and diversify their course offerings. In the case in point, I
would expect to see more study programmes designed for adult students and for
learners with non–traditional backgrounds.

I am calling on institutions to be bolder in their reforms. However, many
European universities may reply that they would very much like to change and
innovate, but have too little room for manoeuvre.

Unfortunately this is the case in many parts of Europe. I fear that public
authorities in charge of education are a little too fond of their professors and
scholars; the embrace of government officials and regulators is a little too tight
and risks to suffocate them and stifle reform.

An open European Higher Education Area also means freedom for the
universities. Governments must resist the temptation to micromanage
universities from above – many have already realised this.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that they should withdraw from their
responsibilities altogether. On the contrary, public authorities would remain
responsible for the rules of the game. For example, they would be in charge of
the qualifications frameworks and of recognition.

But governments should enter a new type of partnership with their
universities—and many have done so already. The public authority would
provide a regulatory framework, policy objectives, and funding and incentives.
In return, the institutions would be free to take their own strategic decisions. I
have no doubt universities and research institutions would thrive on this new
freedom and would use it responsibly.

I want to see more responsive universities, more mobility, more diversity and
more openness to business and society at large, also beyond the Europe borders.
What does ‘openness to business and society’ mean? Among other things, it
means the systematic integration of the notion of employability into curricular
development.

In other words, a freer and more responsible university would also feel
responsible for the occupational future of its graduates. To this end, students
would receive not only discipline–specific skills but also broader employment
related skills.

Fostering an entrepreneurial mindsets and innovation skills should become part
of the normal learning outcomes of many study programmes.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

These are some of the reasons why higher education and research are so
important for us in the knowledge era. However, there is another aspect which is
equally important, and that is why I have saved it for last.
I am talking about innovation. In the modes of production that have emerged in
the past few years, innovation is clearly the number–one factor of growth and
job creation.

And to clear the ground of any misunderstanding, let me specify that I don’t
regard economic success as an end in itself, but as an essential means to
preserve our social model for ourselves and the generations to come.
This is why innovation is so crucial. Now, it seems that in Europe we are not
living up to our century–old tradition of technological and scientific leadership;
we must do something about it to regain the edge.

Our analysis of the challenge convinced us that the real problem lay in the
transition from science and research to innovation proper. In fact, the full picture
would also include education.

I often use a geometrical figure to describe our most urgent task; I am convinced
that Europe’s most urgent need is to bring together the knowledge triangle
composed of education, research and innovation.

One recent initiative of the European Commission is devoted just to that. It is
the European Institute of Technology, or EIT. The EIT is proposed as a model
that shows a new way to do innovation. It will not be a new university, it will be
a new platform of co–operation between university, research and business. It
will bring together – but not physically – the best teams in Europe to address
major challenges facing our societies – such as climate change and renewable
energy.

First of all the EIT will contribute to improve the competitiveness of Europe
directly. It will be a performer, a knowledge operator, not a funding scheme.
It will do research, education and innovation ignoring, existing disciplinary
boundaries.

Secondly, we have designed the EIT to build a critical mass of human and
physical resources, attracting and retaining private–sector investment as well as
the brightest minds from both the scientific and business sectors.

Finally, we believe that the EIT can contribute indirectly to Europe’s
competitiveness by becoming the model of a new way to do innovation. Let me
stress this: the EIT will promote new forms of collaboration around the
knowledge triangle and is set to become a model for the modernisation of higher
education and research institutions.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Meeting the innovation challenge will be a major determinant of Europe’s future
standing.
This is perhaps the best reason why we should not spare our efforts in
supporting education, research and innovation in Europe.

Thank you.