Advantages of transparency. Is it really naive (not to say a bit crazy…), the efforts this column goes to in order to search out a positive aspect to the current phase of European integration? Possibly. But have the sceptics ever given much thought to the advantages which could grow from this obligation to rebalance the public accounts? Such a commitment is not simply binding and disagreeable in nature: it is also the starting point for getting rid of misunderstandings and mistakes, the first of the positive aspects of transparency.
Allow me to explain. The crisis has forced the countries of the EU to take a very close look at their management and their expenditure. The analyses, carried out by both the national authorities and by external observers, have shown up a frightening amount of waste and abuse which, had it not been for the crisis, would never have been brought to light or corrected. Numerous counts of tax evasion, unacceptable advantages earmarked by politicians for politicians, protected professions, disproportionate pensions, neglected obligations… Several member states will come out of the crisis more aware of their shortcomings and problems, and the possibility of putting them right: the result will be an end to many excesses, an improved social balance and a wiser use of public resources.
The clarification of the shortcomings and abuse (which those concerned took pains to conceal) is therefore the first positive element. The countries which fail to make proper use of this new clarity will not be in a position to observe the rules of the eurozone and will, in practice, be obliged to leave it.
Previously non-existent disciplines. The second aspect concerns the creation of new rules, new disciplines and new projects to regulate banking activity. Europe is in the process of creating a vast range of instruments, only some of which are as yet in force and which have still to be added to, but these would not exist at all if the scandals had not broken. If the behaviour which caused so much outrage had not been discovered and put right, the financial world would be continuing to dominate the economy; the phasing-out of privileges is an essential element of a fairer society. The foundations have been laid for a rebalance and it is increasingly obligatory to observe these rules; the banks will have to return to their role of supporting economic activity, which would not have been possible had the excesses not been found out, spoken out against and gradually banned.
Improving the institutional functioning. The third positive element is the capacity to act, which is by and large what the Community institutions have shown. I am aware that this opinion is not universally shared, that there has been some criticism of a certain side slipping from the institutional balance, that delays have been noted and that they are sometimes real, that Community procedures sometimes appear too slow. But the Commission's proposals and the negotiations between the European Parliament and the European Council have achieved significant results, which form the basis of current and future disciplines, and which will feed into a gradual correction of disastrous and unacceptable behaviour on the part of some sections of the financial world. On occasion, compromise has been vital between the Parliament and the Council, but the results are positive all in all: Community legislation is taking shape in the economic and financial areas, with influence over other aspects of EU functioning.
The major political issues of the EU continue to exist. The situation is more complex for the major decisions in principle, responsibility for which comes down to the heads of state and government and the Eurogroup. At these levels, many problems of politics and institutional balance exist; but that goes beyond my remit for today. It is true that at the highest levels, clarity and transparency are becoming more and more standard, but in principle these are practised mainly on an intergovernmental level. The sharing-out of power and responsibilities is not always clear. Community procedures seem hard to apply in fields for which the financial responsibility lies with the states, with no relation to the Community budget; on top of this come ideas for a two-speed Europe: when the Presidency of the Council is held by a country which is not a member of the eurozone this creates problems. The birth, alongside the European Council, of a summit of heads of government of the eurozone, was essential and, within this framework, certain countries have more influence than others.
(FR/transl.fl)