Experts disagree on EU microfinance fund [fr] [de]
A proposed EU microfinance fund, set up earlier this year to stimulate job creation in recession-ridden Europe, has provoked sharp disagreements. Two experts, one from a social NGO and one from a European chamber of commerce, spoke to EurActiv about the scheme's chances.
Ben Butters, director of European affairs at the Association of European Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Eurochambres), believes the fund "will succeed if it genuinely reaches the would-be entrepreneurs and then gets the money to them".
On the other hand, Patrick de Bucquois, president of CEDAG, a European umbrella group for non-profit organisations, argues that in redistributing money from existing social programmes to the fund, the EU is sending completely the wrong message.
The fund was unveiled in July 2009 (EurActiv 02/07/09) and will make €100 million available over a four-year period for newly unemployed people in need of loans to start their own businesses.
But according to de Bucquois, the fund simply will not deliver. "I fully understand that the Commission is under pressure to deliver in this crisis, but even some SME lobbying groups are not very optimistic that this tool will deliver," he said, adding that under the fund's ethos "if you are unemployed, that's your responsibility, we'll provide you with finance, and if you don't succeed, tough luck, you had your chance".
As a whole, de Bucquois questioned whether the fund "is the right tool to allow people to take their responsibilities in an environment of confidence, of legal certainty, and whether the basic protections exist".
Butters countered with the argument that while you do need social protection during a time of economic recovery, "creating new businesses is in itself a positive social measure during a time of crisis".
He went on to argue that if the fund succeeds, "it means creating new jobs, it means getting people off social welfare, and while it may not fall under the usual definition of a social protection measure, to us it's a constructive way of going about things".
However, he was quick to point out that while the concept is to be welcomed, its methodology has to be clarified. "We've heard so many different stories at the national level about efforts to provide guaranteed funds to businesses that aren't working in the current climate because of a breakdown in the chain. This initiative could fall foul of the same problem if we're not careful," he concluded.
Butters and de Bucquois were speaking to Olof Gill.
Sponsors
