03 March 2009

The de Larosière Report: Preliminary commentary and analysis

The report lacks ambition in the discussion of the Supervisory architecture. Proposals seem confined to be 'politically correct' rather than considering structures that would be deemed the most desirable.

The Larosiere report shows a lack of ambition in the discussion of the Supervisory architecture both at European and global level, Paul Goldschmidt, a former director of the  European Commission finds.

The Commission seems to have overlooked the eminently political character of the preliminary choices that need to be confronted in order to implement the indispensable reform of the regulatory and supervisory framework of the financial system, he says.

As far as the architecture of supervisory arrangements at all levels, the proposals seem confined to the “politically correct” rather than considering structures that would be deemed the most desirable.

The Report leaves the reader with the feeling that the Group was invited to abstain from any proposal that would imply an amendment to the Treaty, Goldschmidt says.  

There can be little doubt, however, that the value of this “High Level Report” would be greatly enhanced if it made explicit that a fundamentally inter-governmental architecture will never be able to deliver an optimal regulatory framework, at least as far as the Eurozone is concerned.

 

The full report is attached below

Paul N. Goldschmidt
Director, European Commission (ret.), Member of the Advisory Council of the Thomas More Institute.