Mr Wolf has raised an important question about growth. Let us be clear: growth and a good growth pattern are vital, absolutely essential. The Delors White Paper on growth spells that out. There is no conflict between that and a good social dimension. Article 2 of the original Treaty requires that the two go together. That is what we are seeking to protect. But growth is vital.

The kind of growth pattern we are talking about for this year - 1.6% to 1.8% - and 2.6% next year is not sufficient to stabilize the labour market. We need 3% plus, and we will not be seeing that until 1996 according to the current prognosis, and we need that on a roll-over basis, year by year. And if you remember the last time we had that rate of growth Mr Wolf, between 1986 and 1990, we did create the jobs, nine million of them, but at the end of that period we had only three million fewer unemployed. We have to bear in mind that our unemployment rate here is much lower than in America, Scandinavia or Japan. We have less than 60% unemployment here, whereas it is up to 75% in competing countries. So we have to convert that growth into more jobs and the way we do that is set out in the Delors White Paper. But never let us get into the way of thinking that in some way growth can be treated separately from the question of the Union's social dimension. That is not the way the Commission sees it. We see them goi

ng hand-in-hand, and we see them as complementing and reinforcing each other.

The question of the opt-out keeps raising its head. I would certainly like to see a return to the single legal framework. My experience to date in this matter tells me that the present situation is not sustainable in the long run. I know that I cannot change this. This is a matter for the IGC in 1996, and we all know that unanimity will be required there to change the situation. But I would simply say that the social provisions should apply right across the board. We have to have equality of action, we have to have minimum standards that apply in every single part of the Union, and we have to stop the nonsense we have heard so often about one region being given a competitive edge over another. That is not in line with the fundamental thinking of the founding fathers about the creation of a Union, a union of minds and a union of people. I look forward to this matter being adjusted, hopefully in 1996, but it requires unanimity. I have to say that the only instance so far in the operation of this Union where th

e opt-out was put in place was in the European Works Council proposal, and that has not yet been transposed and implemented in the Member States. So it is a myth to say that in some way the opt-out has given a huge competitive advantage to one region over another. Most of the legislation and the regulation in the social policy area is nationally based. We should at least recognize that. As I see it, the only way to have a minimum standard right across the Union applying everywhere in an even-handed way on a level playing pitch is to have a single legal framework, and that is what I would hope to work towards.