A stroke of inspiration. The idea of “economic governance” of the eurozone and the EU as a whole is now almost a commonplace. Some previously considered it as a dream, whilst others saw it as sacrilege but today it is accepted and, above all, it is being put into practice in operational projects; the details still need to be defined but the principle has been agreed. The justified concerns of member states involved control of their national budgets and were taken into consideration by way of a semantic stroke of inspiration: that of the European semester, which is intended to precede approval of these budgets at national level. I don't know who deserves the credit for this formula but it is superb. It does not include direct or prior interference from the Community institutions in the definition of budgets by the different countries (the prerogative of the national parliaments), but it does imply Community level involvement in a vast preparatory debate, in several phases, in view of defining the general orientations based on the Stability Pact and budgetary imbalance obligations, each parliament remaining in charge of making its own decisions with regard to the management of national resources and taxation. The communication of 30 June by the European Commission should be located in this context and was reported upon at length in EUROPE 10170, with clarifications and comments by President José Manuel Barroso and Commissioner Olli Rehn.
Prerogatives safeguarded. This communication is a very significant stage in the process of putting the mythical economic governance into place because the Commission has taken into account the different reflections, analyses and convergences developed during the previous weeks and months, particularly at the European Council (including the limited formula for eurozone countries) and the Taskforce presided over by Mr Van Rompuy (in which finance ministers from member states take part). I believe that the Commission is right to take into account these essential accomplishments and that its line does not in any way reduce the prerogatives of the European Parliament, which requested that it be included in the work of the Taskforce and which participates directly in the decisions as an equal co-legislator with the Council for all legislative aspects (and will obviously not be denied its voting rights in this connection, see below).
Core “sanctions”. The Commission document is obviously based on the treaty as it stands and does not take a position on the hypothesis of its possible amendment, which is, in any case, (for whom may call for it) a long-term objective, although the first European semester, with all the procedures that this implies, is close upon us - the first semester should already be in 2011. These procedures are outlined in detail and presuppose the review of the code of conduct in the Stability and Growth Pact, to be immediately submitted to the Economy/Finance Council. The semester would therefore begin next January and at the end of February, the European Council would approve the strategic orientations for member states - we can see that the heads of state and government are directly involved from the outset. Procedure follow-up involves the different Community institutions and is expected to be concluded before the final decisions on national budgets, which must correspond to the member states' European commitments and not endanger financial stability in Europe. In this context, a panoply of Commission interventions can be located (analyses, recommendations, procedures, etc) and sanctions, which would be triggered in the event of non-respect of the rules. According to the Commission draft, the current range of sanctions would be expanded and clarified. This is one of the most sensitive and controversial aspects of economic governance and will obviously provoke complex discussions: sanctions must be a sufficient deterrent to member states but must not directly hit the poorest sections of society.
Those who are calling for more. The Parliament has demanded that it be allowed to fully participate in this work, beyond legislative issues. The heads of the political groups have requested that they are also involved in the work of the Taskforce and some of them consider that the debate should be extended to the national parliaments (EUROPE 10170). We are aware of the level of attention and effectiveness with which the parliamentary committees examine and discuss the different draft regulations on the financial world and our publication reports on this question regularly. The results are often positive; for example, in the area of “supervision”, progress towards obtaining compromises with the Council appears remarkable. Nonetheless, certain parliamentarians consider that these compromises are not enough and are calling for more comprehensive and political development. Tomorrow, this column will return to initiatives by Guy Verhofstadt and Pervenche Berès, which go in this direction.
(F.R./transl.fl)