Rémi Godeau

The EU has decided it doesn't want to be left behind on the international stage, L'Opinion observes: “First of all it is a decision in favour of competitiveness vis-à-vis rivals who have a substantial lead. Secondly, it is a decision in favour of self-sufficiency which makes the cultivation of crops that are resistant to drought and disease possible. Thirdly, it is a future-oriented decision, in that it prioritises cutting-edge research, which is at risk of being sidelined.

The measure is particularly harmful to socially disadvantaged students, warns L'Opinion: “It may seem generous at first glance, but in practice it is destructive and, ultimately, unfair. There is no reason to celebrate the pseudo-social progress represented by the blanket introduction of 1-euro meals. ... The outcome is already clear: a fiasco. This measure, with its whiff of populism, will weaken the very people it purports to protect: students who are dependent on government assistance. ...

Verslo žinios takes a closer look: “The EU does indeed need new ways to promote its remaining industry. However, this should not distract from other priorities - deregulation, further integration of the internal market and national reforms of the social security systems - which are more important for Europe's economic growth. ... On the one hand, intense protectionism doesn't yield particularly good results in any market.