Problems of competition (a few), agriculture (a lot) and the Convention (still more) have so taken up this section these past few weeks, that I've been guilty of neglecting a certain number of events and developments worthy of being stressed. Our daily bulletin has reported on these: our readers have thus received all appropriate information. But at times I'd like to have added a few comments. In three cases I shall do so now, succinctly.
Jacques Chirac's initiative for the telecommunications sector. I don't yet intend commenting on the significance or aims of this initiative (the opinions of the Fifteen are not uniform as to whether or not to intervene with public support measures for companies in this sector in difficulty), but only to underpin its form. The French President would like intervention at Community level, on a Commission proposal. His letter to the heads of government states: "I believe that it is time to act, and act at EU level … I would thus like the Commission to prepare proposals so that the European Council of Brussels of March 2003 can decide on the initiatives to take". It's clear: industrial policy initiatives at European level and according to the Community procedure, far from being prohibited, are explicitly requested by a Member state often considered as in favour of increased use of intergovernmental co-operation.
French backing for an increased Commission role in the economic chapter of EMU. France's new direction seems evident too in the complex case of re-balancing Economic and Monetary Union by a strengthening of the economic chapter. Beyond the very clear phrase of Pierre Moscovici, who represents the French authorities in the Convention, in favour of a kind of "economic government" for Europe (see this section of 14 November), Finance Minister Francis Mer recently used words that correct the impression provoked by the way he had, a month earlier, presented his country's 2003 budget. He spoke in favour of increased responsibility for the Commission in the surveillance of the economic policies of Member states, by conferring on it a "capacity of initiative" to intervene when it considers that a country's policy, relating not only to budgetary management but also to inflation and the overall debt, strays from jointly-agreed guidelines. Mr. Mer's stance exceeds the Stability Pact and anticipates the economic policies co-ordination pact, recommended by Jacques Delors. Germany seems to be broadly on the same wavelength. The "small countries" have, rightly, not hesitated in making a few ironic comments on the Franco-German discovery of the importance of inflation and employment; but, as to substance, it is in their interest to facilitate (by controlling inflation) the reduction of the ECB's interest rates, as the effect of economic recovery in large countries would be automatically beneficial for the small ones, their growth being closely linked to developments in France and Germany.
The new proposal on takeover bids rekindles a sensitive debate. The debate over the new proposal presented by the European Commission last month to regulate takeover bids will still run up against quite a few objections and obstacles, as it maintains the principle on which the previous project floundered, the need for specific deliberations within the assembly of shareholders for the management of a company under attack to be able to take defensive steps. Chancellor Schroeder confirmed Germany's negative attitude, and within the European Parliament Willi Rothley announced the opposition of the German Social-Democrats and (he hopes) the Socialist Group as a whole and the left in general. Despite these bellicose stances, I believe that this time the debate will be less divisive and bitter, as it is impossible to overlook the scandals that tarnished the image of managers in the United States and in Europe. In several cases, far from defending the interests of the personnel and shareholders, they shamefully looked after their own interests, by weakening the company for which they were responsible (see this section of 17 September). Who, under these conditions, would allow managers in place to impede a takeover bid? But the takeover system is now situated in the context of a radical package of measures to study (and in part already taken) governing the stock options mechanism, rendering the pay of managers transparent and revising company law in general (with special attention to auditing practices). The choices of Frits Bolkestein, backed by most of the Commission, should come up against less opposition, and compromise solutions seem possible on the controversial aspects. The EU must work fast and well, as confidence in the workings of the financial and stock markets has received a serious blow, and excesses and deviations have a considerable responsibility for the Western world's current economic difficulties, even if at times we try to conceal them. (F.R.)