Mr Barroso and Mr van Rompuy have been charged to produce a reconciliation of the 'no bail out' of 125 and the maintenance of the Euro in the face of the worst that its disparate membership can throw at it. They're as slippery a pair of subtle thinkers on reconciling the irreconcilable as you're likely to meet outside of Dr Amato.
Weighing-in on their side, too, is the fact that all the euro-states are in favour of a permanent mechanism to prevent behaviour likely to precipitate a crisis, and deal with it if an economically rogue government comes to power in a member state - as it did in the United Kingdom (though what was happening to us worried the EU less than what has been going on in Greece, Portugal, Spain and Ireland).
To get the Euro into existence required putting up treaty-entrenched defences of economic and financial policy-independence for individual member states. Now we know that as such independence can be abused by ideological fanaticism, the politically obnoxious building of a client state, and the prioritising of non-European Union agendas by some member-states, these treaty-entrenched defences must be dismantled if the Euro is to survive and flourish.
At the moment a 'minor adjustments' theme is being played as the task is tackled, but when the Presidents come back with their proposals it will be clear that a giant step for Europeans is being taken.
We shall need a referendum in the United Kingdom whatever currency we are using.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
"A politically-rogue government"
Hmm.
What you seem to mean by this (forgive me if I mistake) is a government duly elected by the people and processes of an EU country, but which is not in accordance with the prejudices and plans of the EU elites.
It's not clear to me why the wishes of the latter should have precedence over the clearly-expressed view of the former.
Berlusconi has created a rogue government, Yacht, though the reasonable Italians are beating him back in his criminal's attempts to gain immunity from prosecution at whatever cost for himself and his associates and enterprises.
Brown's administration was a rogue government in that it was carrying through policies unrecognisable to those who voted Blair into office in 2005.
The democratic route to tyranny is paved with what its followers no doubt regard as good intentions. Though I take your point; if a government is elected it's pretty dubious trying to shift them by anything other than forcing another election, or ensuring a scheduled election takes place.
Post a Comment