Sunday, October 26, 2014
14

欧洲的必要联盟

布鲁塞尔—欧洲债务危机的后果在欧盟大部显露无疑,而与此同时,受困经济体纷纷试图站稳脚跟、重振增长。在过去几年中,欧盟做出过多项重要决定,但现实表明我们需要做更多的事情来应对欧元区所面临的挑战。

欧盟各国各部无不正在实行改革和整合措施。联合金融防线已经打造成型。欧洲央行也不断地表明它将力挺欧元。但专家和伙伴常常低估了我们的决心。

到目前为止,我们所采取的措施增加而不是减少了欧洲的一体化。诚然,有时候我们的民主制度决策需要较长时间。但不能因此把我们一竿子打死:谈判是关于怎样做安排的,而不是关于最后结果的。欧盟内部具有足够的政治意愿采取一切必要手段捍卫欧元,因为单一货币的未来决定了欧洲的一体化。

欧洲所需要的后续措施必须深深地植根于深入一体化的承诺中。主权债务水平高企,加上金融部门中某些部分的不当行为,放大了欧元区危机,也造成了重要的信心问题,如今需要系统性方案才能解决。

这就是为什么我们必须完成未竟的经济和货币联盟事业,也是为什么欧洲委员会长期以来认为建立银行联盟是迈向这一目标的不可或缺的步骤。欧洲委员会即将给出的新方案将是范围更广的方案组合的一部分,而这一方案组合将引导欧洲形成重写欧洲一体化边界的经济、财政和政治联盟。

危机无情地揭露了现有银行监督体系的不充分性。我们必须在合作的基础上更进一步,成立泛欧盟(特别是欧元区)的监督当局。主权债务和银行债务之间的联系必须一次性地予以彻底切断。我们必须终结一个恶性循环——用纳税人的钱(目前超过4.5万亿欧元)拯救银行会威胁政府预算,而对风险越来越厌恶的银行不再为企业提供必须的贷款资金,从而进一步破坏经济。

欧洲可以从现在开始采取果断行动切断这一负向动态。目前,正在推出面向单一市场的单一金融服务规则。在此基础上,一个单一欧洲银行监督当局将扫清通过欧洲稳定性机制、共同存款保险以及单一破产框架对银行进行直接资本重组的障碍。

9月12日,欧洲委员会将提交关于单一银行监督机制(Single Banking Supervisory Mechanism)的方案。该机制将基于三大关键原则:

单一监督者:在欧元区内部,光有国家级监督机构的合作是不够的。产生于某一国的风险可能影响整个货币区。欧元区需要共同银行监督者增强使用共同金融防线的国家的信心。

信誉:欧元区的新银行监督机制将以欧洲央行为核心。委托欧洲央行的任务将确保对欧元区银行的严格、高质量且平等的审慎监督,从而在维持银行间信心——从而增加整个欧元区的金融未定型方面起到关键性作用。国家级监督者的密切合作也将纳入这一框架。

欧洲央行的监督职责将完全与其货币政策责任分离。与此同时,欧洲银行局(European Banking Authority)将继续完成现有任务,即为整个单一市场制定单一规则并确保整个欧盟的监督行动的一致性。

广泛一致:所有欧元区银行都将被纳入欧洲监督系统。我们需要解决欧元区成员国和不使用欧元的欧盟成员国之间的差异问题,后者中不少也愿意加入新的监督机制。

我们决定采取的道路将允许我们迅速行动起来。单一银行监督机制并不要求改动欧盟条约,可以在2013年1月就开始实施。

共同和更佳一体化的监督是通向银行联盟的第一步。接着,欧洲委员会将继续发展我们的当前方案,纳入存款担保机制和银行破产机制,向单一破产基金和单一破产管理当局的方向迈进。一旦这些方案被实施,银行联盟也就完整了。

2013年成立银行联盟并不能赋予欧洲魔法,一下子就清除经济危机;但这是重建欧洲人民、国际合作伙伴和投资者信心的重要而关键的一步。这将确保金融稳定性、增加透明度、让银行部门可问责、并保护纳税人的钱。

此外,这还是更大的棋的起手式。我想再次强调,欧元区正在从历史中吸取教训,并着眼于一体化的未来而不是过去。这是一个好消息,不仅对欧元是如此,对全球经济亦然。

Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (14)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedJohn Brian Shannon

    José Manuel Barroso paints a very reassuring picture of the future of European stability.

    It is easy to feel positive about the long-term (and continuing) political and economic success of Europe and the Eurozone countries, what remains to be seen is how quickly they can rebound from the present problems.

    Of course many of us would like the plans discussed in the article to come to fruition today -- if not sooner. But we also realize that anything worth doing at all, it is worth doing right.

    The sooner mutualized national debt assurance, a single financial services rulebook and fiscal and monetary union occurs, the sooner the economic recovery will happen.

    Since the end of WWII, the European success story continues and looking back, every test provided an opportunity to either fail or succeed. Thus far, it has been success built upon success -- let us hope that will continue to be the case.

    It's not just about Europe anymore, as increasingly, Europe's success is our success, wherever we may be in the world.

    John Brian Shannon
    http://jbsnews.wordpress.com

  2. CommentedAndré Rebentisch

    What gets discussed here by the President is beyond the purvue of the European Commission. The question arises why Barroso does not do more within the community method framework, here the Commission enjoys a prerogative of legislative initiative. I am still waiting for a shift to Ordnungspolitik.

  3. CommentedPaul A. Myers

    The high levels of sovereign debt will drive ever deeper European integration because at each step of the process integration is cheaper than some sort of default.

    Financial integration can stave off default, but it cannot restart significant growth. So somewhere up ahead public dissatisfaction with zero growth has to lead to structural reform within the context of increasing integration.

    The benefits of integration will flow to those countries that restructure to harvest the benefits. Undoubtedly this will be politically uncomfortable.

  4. CommentedMark Pitts

    Please clarify the issue of the 4.5 trillion euros used to rescue European banks:

    How much of the money was repaid by the banks?

    Of the part that was repaid, did the taxpayers gain or lose on the transaction?

    Of the part not repaid, do taxpayers hold collateral? Are taxpayers likely to be repaid in the future?

    (I don’t know the answers to these questions, that’s why I am asking.)


  5. CommentedRoman Bleifer

    Strengthening of European integration (including the creation of monetary and fiscal union), move to a confederal structure - it is the only way to keep Europe as one of the world's leading economic and political centers. Otherwise, Europe will become a dull province of the 21st century ( http://crisismir.com/analiticheskie-materialy/ekonomika/13-mirovoj-ekonomicheskij-krizis-prichiny-i-posledstviya-quo-vadis.html ). Only the strengthening of European integration is extremely slow, if anything goes. I doubt that the global crisis will give a lot of time.

  6. CommentedAlexandros Liakopoulos

    @Marc Pitts Have you not read the article??? This article, right here, Mr Baroso's article! Have you not read it?

    I am amazed. Which part of Mr Baroso's statement - as follows - is not clear enough??!!! He writes:

    "We must end the vicious circle whereby the use of taxpayers’ funds – more than €4.5 trillion ($5.7 trillion) so far – to rescue banks weakens governments’ budgets, while increasingly risk-averse banks stop lending to businesses that need funds, undermining the economy further."

      CommentedMark Pitts

      I was just asking for a reference so that I can read more and understand the situation better.

  7. CommentedZsolt Hermann

    There is no question about the need of full integration,deeper and mutual cooperation at every level of life not only in Europe but all over the world since simply we evolved into a global, integral and fully interdependent human network which we have to adapt to.
    But at the moment there is no democratic process, the process that is going on and is proposed is not democratic or free at all, it is simply a process to provide the present status quo safeguards, to continue the present excessive overproduction/over consumption machinery at all cost, totally regardless of the actual people of the actual countries.
    So far it has been most obvious in the case of Greece where all the decisions, packages are driven through at a high level, without any participation of the actual nation, making their lives more and more difficult at every turn.
    And the same fate awaits Spain and Italy, and then later on all the other members including Germany since the crisis does not stop as we are not solving it but deepening it by wasting all the resources on institutions and ideas that themselves are causing the problem. Instead of revealing and solving the disease all our attempts are aimed at hiding and maintaining it.
    Until we understand the reasons why we are in a crisis, until we change ourselves and adapt to the natural system around us and start living within our necessities and resources there is no point in talking about integration, since we are like a group of thieves who join forces in order to be capable of stealing more effectively.
    Integration has to go hand in hand with changing the foundation on we live our lives, we relate to each other.
    We have run out of the time where half measures could succeed, we are surrounded by unbending laws we have to follow.

  8. CommentedAlexandros Liakopoulos

    4,5 trillion euros given to the banks from the European public cashiers... and we still talk about a "crisis"? What crisis? For who is this a critical situation? For Banks it was, nowadays it is not any more, due to people's money. And ot only that, they also defend their position in proposing the neoliberal arrangements they were always targetting, exactly on the very fact the people were obliged to buy their own deficits and to legalise scams of the past. Currently, they seem quite anxious to prove their predominant role on the European Institutional Map, through a Banking Union with no political counterpart. And the President of the European Commission backs them up in their proposals. Pffff... well, maybe banksters are right and there is a "crisis" at the economic field. However, if one examines the data of the "crisis" so far, if he/she analyzes the specific figures and the amounts involved, the direction of the capitalo flow and the ongoing neoliberal transformation of the EU's Social Model, one can come up with a concrete idea about the New Banksters Union of the European Continent... whether Germany will manage to balance this tension without destroying the whole of the project due to the well-known german reflexes on external pressures, is a an active bet on which the Peace and Prosperity of the whole continent is linked... and another bet is the reflexes of the European People: their response to the ongoing development of the Pan-European Banking Scam Operration which is described as "crisis", will very much form the final outcome of the process... Mr Baroso, Mr Draghi and Mrs Merkel, as also all other European Leaders (!) should bear in mind that ultimate judge of their actions are their people, as far as democracy still applies in EU...

      CommentedMark Pitts

      @Alexandros, Could you provide a reference for the amount given to European banks from public funds? Thanks.

  9. CommentedFrank O'Callaghan

    This is part of the mechanism that should have existed before the single currency. It's absence was a gift to speculators. The current situation is merely a way of allowing private bondholders to make good on their lost bets at the expense of the European citizen.

    A progressive redistribution of wealth in the egalitarian direction within Europe, together with distribution of work and power is the only way to ensure a growing economy.

    The utilisation of this crisis to centralise power at the undemocratic core is the death knell of a better system. The move away from the social solidarity of the European model is an injection of instability. Modes of production in the global economy make increasing wealth easily achievable. The difficulty is it's distribution. Our 'fictionalisation' of finance is the greatest obstacle.

      CommentedMark Pitts

      @Aldo - I certainly agree with your conjecture that banks have to take responsibility for their actions. However, in advocating more regulation, you ignore two important points:

      Through government regulations, banks are more or less forced to buy government debt. Thus, in many ways their “irresponsible” actions were dictated by the state.

      In advocating more regulation, one argues for more decision-making power to the government. But governmental financial mismanagement is the reason many banks are having problems.

      It’s hard to argue that government is a better financial manager than the private sector. I wouldn't trust the politicians with my savings.

      CommentedAldo Dias

      Mark Pitts - Of course you can, its called the free market. Losses are as important as profits, they ensure responsibility and adequate risk. The debt stems from businesses deals whereby the lending party calculated the risk of default of the borrowing party and established a correspondent interest rate. Shared responsibility is the cause of the problem and the rule of the game.

      Further, you seem to ignore or overlook the dynamic that the institutional crisis took on, whereby credit rating agencies where not only commenting on current conditions but also downgrading half the eurozone at a time for the stated reason of influencing impending EU summits. Speculation is not something that is born out of left-wing people's ignorance of or despise for wall street jargon. It exists now as it did in the time of the european exchange rate mechanism, and like then it was born out of institutional weakness and confusion and not underlying economic unbalances. This time around, however, there is clearly an added institutional weakness, which is the financial deregulation which led us to this, which persists unchanged and unfettered despite massive, transcontinental public outcry, and (seemingly) a consensus of the main, if not all, political parties.

      CommentedMark Pitts

      The primary loss that private bond holders suffered was by "betting" that the governments would repay what they borrowed. You cannot blame investors because the governments mismanaged their finances.

Featured