Whilst the many-faceted and complex dossier of financial supervision is making progress (the Parliament has confirmed its willingness to reach a compromise with the Council, while reaffirming its essential demands, see our publication yesterday), Didier Reynders, the new president of the Economy/Finance Council, has outlined his objectives. By drawing from a variety of different sources (personal interviews, the Ecofin chapter in the Presidency programme, etc), it is possible to deduce a number of significant orientations:
a) Tax on the banks. An international level tax would be ideal but in the absence of an agreement at the G20, it would have to be introduced at a European level, if necessary exclusively between eurozone countries by using provisions in the Lisbon Treaty on enhanced cooperation.
b) Tax on financial transactions. The Belgian Presidency's objective is to reach a political agreement in principle targeting ultra fast transactions, which do not generate any real value.
c) Economic governance. Its European character must be affirmed by introducing, “within certain limits”, transfers of sovereignty from member states to the Union. According to Mr Reynders, “strengthening the role of the Commission would be logical, as is the case in the field of competition” - a bold comparison. He is not disputing the role of the Council or that of the heads of state and government in the definition of the objectives on rules but a management instrument is indispensable and, in his opinion, this instrument is the Commission. He points out that in 2004/2005, France and Germany both had to introduce greater flexibility into the Stability Pact, for which they had not respected the rules. According to Mr Reynders, this is proof that “going back to the Council to monitor application of the rules does not work”.
d) Extended governance. Mr Reynders intends to launch a debate on extended governance before the end of the year, namely, not only economic but also environmental and social governance. We are aware that such an extension is broadly accepted but what it actually means should be clarified.
It's quite apparent that while Mr Reynders remains cautious, he is quite optimistic about opportunities for making progress. His options can be located in the traditional Belgian line in favour of strengthening the Community element in relation to intergovernmental formulas. Support for him from the European Parliament will undoubtedly be obtained.
An ECB initiative involves revision of the Treaty. The increasing number of drafts and initiatives is positive. Yesterday, this column looked at the orientations of Guy Verhofstadt and Pervenche Berès. The European Commission is trying its best to take into account the positions of the different member states (too much, according to some observers) but how can it be argued that its initiatives are not going in the right direction? The road ahead is difficult and certain essential questions have still not been answered. The first is essential: Is efficient economic governance and respect for the rules which are indispensable for good management of the euro possible with the current Treaty? The Franco-German compromise claims that: definitions of the measures are indispensable and it will be up to the legal experts to assess whether revision of the Treaty is required or not. The position of Mr Van Rompuy is pragmatic: there is an urgent need for action using the existing instruments but he does not exclude the possibility of revising the Treaty “if there is consensus”. The European Central Bank (ECB) suggests that in the context of economic sanctions for infringing budgetary discipline, there is indeed a procedure involving a revision of the Treaty!
The “Van Rompuy Taskforce”, the European Commission and the Parliament will examine the contents contained within the ECB proposal. Our publication will be returning to the technical aspects in this connection. It is clear that this will involve a revision of the Treaty. This could be fast-tracked: a “small revision”, in practice involving eurozone countries, could be added to the accession treaty for Croatia and ratified by the member states with this Treaty. It will not be necessary to organise a new Convention or an intergovernmental conference (IGC) because the Lisbon Treaty introduced (Article. Paragraph 6) a simplified procedure, which allows for revision of the way in which the Union functions, through a decision by the European Council at unanimity, following consultation with the European Parliament and the Commission. The Parliament (and this is one of its new powers) can activate this procedure itself. The unanimity of member states and ratifications remain necessary but the way ahead has been simplified. Do we need to try it out right away?
(F.R./transl.fl)