After Protesilaos Stavrou, we look at what another valued euroblogger wrote about the joint letter, or should we say letters, from the German chancellor Angela Merkel and the French president Nicolas Sarkozy to Herman Van Rompuy, the president of the European Council invited to come up with concrete proposals by October.
FT Brussels blog
On the FT Brussels blog, Peter Spiegel discussed the sidelining of the European Commission. Van Rompuy would chair the summits, aided by a new secretariat, and new analytical capacities would be created (to complement those of the Commission, the ECB and the IMF).
The intergovernmental approach would play into the hands of the governments of the bigger eurozone countries, like France and Germany.
Spiegel foresees some nasty institutional fights: Is the Sarko-Merkel plan anti-Commission? (18 August 2011).
Since then, Stanley Pignal has discussed the ideas of the Belgian acting finance minister Didier Reynders on eurozone reform, a finance minister for the euro area and eurobonds, on the FT Brussels blog: Reynders redux (19 August 2011).
***
I agree with the analysis about the intergovernmental thrust of the Franco-German letter, but the eurozone summits would undermine the Euro Group as well as the Commission.
When chancellor Merkel and president Sarkozy say that ”(t)he European Parliament, the European Commission and the national parliaments should be associated to this process in their respective capacities”, it looks like a polite way of telling them not to expect any crumbs from the table of the leaders of this silent coup.
***
Multilingual Bloggingportal.eu is an important part of the European public space, bringing you the new articles on 839 euroblogs.
Ralf Grahn
Showing posts with label FT Brussels blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FT Brussels blog. Show all posts
Monday, 22 August 2011
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Merriment at FT Brussels blog
Tony Barber’s post at the Financial Times Brussels blog catches the mood: Barroso’s impotent EU critics hop with fury (13 May 2009).
What else can they do?
A sizeable portion of the heads of state or government have shown that their union is not going to concede even the presidency of the Commission to the voters in the European elections (out of the top jobs under the Lisbon Treaty).
Well in advance of the elections to the European Parliament, they have – as national party leaders – across party lines incapacitated the Europarties, leaving the European People’s Party (EPP) with the only declared candidate: a renewed mandate for José Manuel Barroso.
Impotent fury or realistic assessment of the state of the union, Adam Smith comes to mind (with minor alterations):
Heads of state or government seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to undermine democracy.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The sadness of the situation is in no way lessened by the populist quality of much dissent, as shown in the post European elections: The Libertas Collection.
What else can they do?
A sizeable portion of the heads of state or government have shown that their union is not going to concede even the presidency of the Commission to the voters in the European elections (out of the top jobs under the Lisbon Treaty).
Well in advance of the elections to the European Parliament, they have – as national party leaders – across party lines incapacitated the Europarties, leaving the European People’s Party (EPP) with the only declared candidate: a renewed mandate for José Manuel Barroso.
Impotent fury or realistic assessment of the state of the union, Adam Smith comes to mind (with minor alterations):
Heads of state or government seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to undermine democracy.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The sadness of the situation is in no way lessened by the populist quality of much dissent, as shown in the post European elections: The Libertas Collection.
Friday, 24 April 2009
Elections in Iceland (continued) & Baltic states: perplexing euro adoption
Yesterday I admitted to being mystified by some Icelanders’ optimism regarding adoption of the euro currency, while rejecting membership in the European Union, or even membership negotiations.
Among the reasons for my perplexity in Iceland & EU: Monetary union only? (23 April 2009) were the existing exceptions, according to Wikipedia Montenegro, Kosovo, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, the Vatican.
***
FT Brussels blog
Today I see that Tony Barber of the FT Brussels blog had posted on another angle of the same problem: Hands up if you’d like to use the euro! (23 April 2009).
Barber appears to be as puzzled as I am over the fact that the Baltic states have laboured hard to become members of the European Union and to prepare for adoption of the single currency. But the European Central Bank refuses to ease the rules to let Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in, despite the hardship caused by the economic crisis.
All the while, Montenegro and Kosovo have used and keep using the euro, without being members of the EU or subject to the rules of the economic and monetary union (EMU).
Amazing!
***
By the rules
Whether Iceland or new EU member states in Central Europe, my post yesterday only indicated the basic premises for the euro currency, by a quote from the Preamble of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
If a country follows the rules, it has to:
1. Become a member of the European Union, and participate in economic policy coordination.
2. Fulfil the convergence criteria, also known as the Maastricht criteria (low inflation, budget deficit, government debt level, participation in the Exchange Rate mechanism, low interest rates).
Some humanity, solidarity, logic and enlightenment seem to be in order.
Ralf Grahn
Among the reasons for my perplexity in Iceland & EU: Monetary union only? (23 April 2009) were the existing exceptions, according to Wikipedia Montenegro, Kosovo, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, the Vatican.
***
FT Brussels blog
Today I see that Tony Barber of the FT Brussels blog had posted on another angle of the same problem: Hands up if you’d like to use the euro! (23 April 2009).
Barber appears to be as puzzled as I am over the fact that the Baltic states have laboured hard to become members of the European Union and to prepare for adoption of the single currency. But the European Central Bank refuses to ease the rules to let Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in, despite the hardship caused by the economic crisis.
All the while, Montenegro and Kosovo have used and keep using the euro, without being members of the EU or subject to the rules of the economic and monetary union (EMU).
Amazing!
***
By the rules
Whether Iceland or new EU member states in Central Europe, my post yesterday only indicated the basic premises for the euro currency, by a quote from the Preamble of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
If a country follows the rules, it has to:
1. Become a member of the European Union, and participate in economic policy coordination.
2. Fulfil the convergence criteria, also known as the Maastricht criteria (low inflation, budget deficit, government debt level, participation in the Exchange Rate mechanism, low interest rates).
Some humanity, solidarity, logic and enlightenment seem to be in order.
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday, 21 April 2009
USA & EU: Fathers founding and confounding
Tony Barber wrote The EU, the US founding fathers and the “last word” on the FT Brussels blog (20 April 2009) as if astonished that the Treaty of Lisbon could not and should not be the last word on EU reform.
The difference between America and Europe is that the US founding fathers wrote one unworkable blueprint, the Articles of Confederation, before they agreed on a robust Constitution a decade later. Fast learners with guts.
The European member states have tinkered with reform since 1950, and have achieved volumes of rules and exceptions. They are still a long way from a union either effective or democratic, although the European Union is exceptional among treaty based international organisations.
Individual leaders of EU member states have said that the European Union should take a break from institutional reform after the Treaty of Lisbon, but I am not aware of any solemn promises binding on the EU.
Anyway, to give such assurances would be stupid, especially if the leaders have analysed the shape of world affairs.
In effect a promised moratorium would be an undertaking to let Europe continue its slide into oblivion from the world scene. Well, it would not be the first former great civilisation in world history to do so (normally unwittingly), but is that in the interest of EU citizens?
Credit to Andrew Duff for stating the obvious.
Ralf Grahn
The difference between America and Europe is that the US founding fathers wrote one unworkable blueprint, the Articles of Confederation, before they agreed on a robust Constitution a decade later. Fast learners with guts.
The European member states have tinkered with reform since 1950, and have achieved volumes of rules and exceptions. They are still a long way from a union either effective or democratic, although the European Union is exceptional among treaty based international organisations.
Individual leaders of EU member states have said that the European Union should take a break from institutional reform after the Treaty of Lisbon, but I am not aware of any solemn promises binding on the EU.
Anyway, to give such assurances would be stupid, especially if the leaders have analysed the shape of world affairs.
In effect a promised moratorium would be an undertaking to let Europe continue its slide into oblivion from the world scene. Well, it would not be the first former great civilisation in world history to do so (normally unwittingly), but is that in the interest of EU citizens?
Credit to Andrew Duff for stating the obvious.
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
