Community method and national sovereignty. There is no subject that should be excluded from a commentary. Even when the boundaries of reality are pushed to the limit, there will always be some people who are not averse to adopting this approach. In the real case in point, however - putting European economic governance into practice within the eurozone (and perhaps even beyond) - the road already covered has been monumental. Just a few months ago, it was nothing but a mirage, a non-subject and the most steadfast adversary to it was Germany. Today, it is Germany that is calling for governance that is as comprehensive and detailed as possible. Chancellor Merkel considers that this is indeed a condition for the euro's very survival.
In this context, how should the spat between the Community method and respect for national sovereignty be considered? Guy Verhofstadt sees this as a fundamental issue and considers that only the Community method is acceptable (see this column yesterday). Other senior figures express less categorical positions.
Philippe Herzog: walking on two legs. The founder of Confrontations Europe believes that a mixture of the Community and the intergovernmental methods is inevitable. He considers that the Commission should not be offended by having to cooperate with member state governments because this kind of cooperation does not, in his opinion, preclude the Community trajectory: “we need to learn to walk on two legs”. What counts, is the objective, namely: making concrete commitments, which cover both wages and social benefits; tackling the question of excessive debt in both public and private spheres; and so on and so forth. Philippe Herzog believes that “current sacrifices can be justified by real hope in a better future, which involves more investment and reforms in the areas of education, innovation and infrastructure”. He is not exactly a fan of theoretical disagreements for their own sake because “in the context of a pact, people are interested in its substance and not in the conflict surrounding the question of remit… people need to understand that they must face up to the imperative of competitiveness, the goal being improved employment prospects. Many people still do not accept what is really happening and the efforts needed in this connection.”
The danger of populist sloganeering. It is quite clear that Mr Herzog is not an advocate of what he considers certain demagogic positions, which would create the impression of claiming that one or another country in the eurozone should be exempt from the rules laid down in this zone, particularly with regard to budgetary discipline. I would like to emphasise that by discussing the question of populist reflexes, it does not involve a blanket targeting of socialist positions, because no one should forget that two socialist governments are currently fighting to remain in the eurozone - the Greek and Spanish governments - which have agreed to accept the discipline required in this respect and face down strikes and demonstrations from their own citizens when they demand, for example, that the retirement age be maintained, when this (has been modified everywhere else or is currently being reviewed due to greater average life expectancy).
The conclusive comment made in this column yesterday pointed out that participating in the eurozone is not compulsory, but those that wish to participate must respect the rules. Does this need to be repeated ad infinitum?
National positions elegantly expressed. Germany has amended its constitution in order to include within it the obligation of having to respect certain insurmountable budget deficit limits. France intends to do likewise. These two countries together would like all eurozone members to consider introducing similar provisions. Denmark is not part of the eurozone but is currently developing both tough and progressive provisions in the pensions field: the retirement age will automatically depend upon statistical trends involving life expectancy. Poland has introduced a number of measures in an effort to be up to speed with the situation in the eurozone. Its constitution now prohibits public debt overshooting 60% of gross national product and the country has also introduced additional rules linking public spending to inflation. In this country, pension reform has been carried out for a number of years and is still continuing. It is quite apparent that Poland is determined to make the great leap forward to the single currency as rapidly as possible.
Support, yes but without changing the rules. It is obvious that the EU will continue to support less well off member states, whether this involves funding from the cohesion policy or other measures included in Community policies. This will help eurozone countries experiencing difficulty to respect the rules in this area. Nonetheless, they should not expect to be granted exemptions because this is a single currency and its management can only be done with this in mind. Tomorrow, this column will highlight the main distinctions between member states. It will confirm the fact that divergences regarding future management of the euro are still quite considerable but should not be overblown. The objective still involves smoothing out the differences before the end of the month. If this is not done, the very existence of the euro may be compromised. (F.R./transl.fl)