Europe, for once, is getting interesting. In the past few days they have had a rewriting of the fiscal-policy rules underpinning the euro, the beginning of the end of France?s economically damaging 35-hour week, and a debate on economic reforms at a Brussels summit of European Union (EU) leaders.

They even have polls raising the prospect of a French referendum rejection of the EU constitution (France came close to saying no to the Maastricht treaty 13 years ago). The constitution debate is hotting up.

Ireland has averaged 7 per cent growth over the past seven years, or Luxembourg at 4 per cent plus, Greece 4 per cent, Spain with an average growth rate approaching 4 per cent, or Finland with 3 per cent plus. The older, bigger, continental EU economies ? Germany, France and Italy ? have done badly. The smaller, agile members have done rather better. This is also true of economic reform.

Five years ago in Portugal, EU leaders signed up an ambitious programme to make Europe?s economy flexible and competitive. At the halfway stage, as a recent high-level group headed by former Dutch PM Wim Kok pointed out, progress can be described at best as patchy. Denmark, Finland and Sweden have led a Scandinavian drive towards flexibility, and Ireland, Spain and Britain have also done well. They are the heroes of the Lisbon process, according to a Centre for European Reform (CER) assessment.

But others, notably France, Germany, Italy, Belgium and Greece, come out as villains. Of the 17 targets set out for reform, Greece has achieved precisely none. But Italy, the CER says, scores even worse than Greece for overall progress. Last week?s dismantling comes with strings attached. Firms can buy an extra 220 hours a year of work from their employees (up from 180 allowed until now), with the option of additional overtime on top of that. The effect on actual hours worked, however, may not be that large.