The directly elected European institution ended the inquiry on assistance programmes with a very political outcome
Opinion
Troika «helped to avoid the worst», but its intervention seriously affected the social dimension of countries under assistance programme. This is the European Parliament position on the activity conducted by the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus. MEPs approved two resolutions ending the Employment and the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee's inquiry into the workings of the Troika, and the final result is a text opened that can be interpreted in several different ways. The debate on Troika responsibility could be long and huge, perhaps with no end. What can be immediately noted is that European Parliament plenary vote confirms what was already clear for everybody: social situation in countries such as Greece was deteriorated by Troika. Unemployment has increased, particularly among the young - leading to their emigration - and many small businesses have failed. Moreover poverty rates have risen, including among the middle class. There is nothing new compared to what it has been written and filmed by media. Of course, an official parliamentary inquiry is not a newspaper article, which means that only a European institution can deplore what made by another European institution. Referring to this issue, it has to be pointed out members of the Parliament didn't disavow Troika actions. Or well, they did only in part.
Saying the Troika helped to avoid the worst, the European Parliament avoided an institutional crisis with both the EU Commission and the ECB, and - above all - avoided to send a dangerous message for investors and markets: recognising that Troika did badly could undermine trust and confidence in the EU. But adding critics on how Troika managed the situation MEPs recognised something was wrong: they agree with those who believe the cure is an heavy one. Here it has to be remarked that the position of the European Parliament is that the cure was painful, and not the cure was worse than the sickness: that is the meaning of the expression "the Troika helped to avoid the worst". Affirming the European Parliament adopted a compromise between approval and condemnation wouldn't be wrong, and it seems it's exactly what happened.
A further consideration has to be made on what has been "censored" by the European Parliament. First of all let's say MEPs showed pragmatism: what is done is done, so acting doesn't make sense. That is the approach to what has been produced in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus. Consequently the only useful and reasonable thing to do is to learn the lesson Troika programmes taught. The European Parlament set new rule out. As a first step from now on transparent and binding rules of procedure will have to be established for the interaction of the Troika institutions which regulate the allocation of tasks between them. An improved communication strategy is also an «utmost priority», says the Economic Affairs Committee text. In any case future adjustment programmes would need to come with a «plan B» should assumptions prove wrong, and the memoranda of understanding (MoU) underpinning them will need to reflect the social and employment dimensions better. Each country placed under a programme should moreover have a «growth task force». Finally, much more effort must be made to ensure the vital accountability and national ownership. MEPs also called the EU Commission, the ECB and the Eurogroup to review and revise the measures put in place «as soon as possible», asking for EU support - with «sufficient financial resources» - in order to restore social protection standards. In other words what is done is done, and now it's time to start doing something different. The European Parliament offered a nice lesson of politics to be kept and studied. That is what in Brussels - and even more in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus - they hope are going to do Troika institutions.
Troika «helped to avoid the worst», but its intervention seriously affected the social dimension of countries under assistance programme. This is the European Parliament position on the activity conducted by the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus. MEPs approved two resolutions ending the Employment and the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee's inquiry into the workings of the Troika, and the final result is a text opened that can be interpreted in several different ways. The debate on Troika responsibility could be long and huge, perhaps with no end. What can be immediately noted is that European Parliament plenary vote confirms what was already clear for everybody: social situation in countries such as Greece was deteriorated by Troika. Unemployment has increased, particularly among the young - leading to their emigration - and many small businesses have failed. Moreover poverty rates have risen, including among the middle class. There is nothing new compared to what it has been written and filmed by media. Of course, an official parliamentary inquiry is not a newspaper article, which means that only a European institution can deplore what made by another European institution. Referring to this issue, it has to be pointed out members of the Parliament didn't disavow Troika actions. Or well, they did only in part.
Saying the Troika helped to avoid the worst, the European Parliament avoided an institutional crisis with both the EU Commission and the ECB, and - above all - avoided to send a dangerous message for investors and markets: recognising that Troika did badly could undermine trust and confidence in the EU. But adding critics on how Troika managed the situation MEPs recognised something was wrong: they agree with those who believe the cure is an heavy one. Here it has to be remarked that the position of the European Parliament is that the cure was painful, and not the cure was worse than the sickness: that is the meaning of the expression "the Troika helped to avoid the worst". Affirming the European Parliament adopted a compromise between approval and condemnation wouldn't be wrong, and it seems it's exactly what happened.
A further consideration has to be made on what has been "censored" by the European Parliament. First of all let's say MEPs showed pragmatism: what is done is done, so acting doesn't make sense. That is the approach to what has been produced in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus. Consequently the only useful and reasonable thing to do is to learn the lesson Troika programmes taught. The European Parlament set new rule out. As a first step from now on transparent and binding rules of procedure will have to be established for the interaction of the Troika institutions which regulate the allocation of tasks between them. An improved communication strategy is also an «utmost priority», says the Economic Affairs Committee text. In any case future adjustment programmes would need to come with a «plan B» should assumptions prove wrong, and the memoranda of understanding (MoU) underpinning them will need to reflect the social and employment dimensions better. Each country placed under a programme should moreover have a «growth task force». Finally, much more effort must be made to ensure the vital accountability and national ownership. MEPs also called the EU Commission, the ECB and the Eurogroup to review and revise the measures put in place «as soon as possible», asking for EU support - with «sufficient financial resources» - in order to restore social protection standards. In other words what is done is done, and now it's time to start doing something different. The European Parliament offered a nice lesson of politics to be kept and studied. That is what in Brussels - and even more in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus - they hope are going to do Troika institutions.
No comments:
Post a Comment