|
|
Eurozone countries have drawn the lessons from past mistakes. Much has already been achieved over the past two years to address some of the most obvious deficiencies. But to become fully solid and stable, the euro area still needs to evolve. This will involve further integration − financially, but also fiscally and economically. This is certainly a big step for the eurozone. Complex decisions lie ahead for the countries that belong to it.
Understandably, this can raise hesitations or worries, especially from countries, like Britain, outside the eurozone. But we are not looking at a "big bang" moment for the eurozone, a sudden mutation that would transform it into a completely different beast. And we are certainly not witnessing the birth of a hyper centralised "euro state" within our Union.
In any case, however far eurozone integration eventually goes, my responsibilities and my conviction push me to strive for all 27 members of the Union to remain involved in the decisions that will lead us there. I always have done, and always will (even if, to my regret, at one single occasion last December, this was not possible).
I know I've been sometimes derided in the press for not using my powerful charisma to its full... Let's put it this way: it is my political choice to put consensus first, to act as a bridge-builder, to maintain trusts between the Member States. We have countries big and small, old and new, East and West, North and South, and yes, also inside and outside the eurozone. Within the Union there are many bridges (and tunnels) to be built, not just across the Channel!
The European Banking Authority, based here in London, will get an even more central role: it is solely in charge of preparing the single rulebook for the single financial market. Its voting modalities will be amended precisely to ensure a fair representation of all Member States, especially those outside the monetary union.
So why do we need a banking union? Quite simply: it will contribute to put an end to the financial fragmentation that is so profoundly undermining the provision of credit to companies and households. This is not only essential for businesses across the Union, it is particularly essential for a country like Britain whose biggest export is financial services to the rest of the EU. I've also come to reassure you on something else: in terms of day-to-day work, the single market remains the European Union's core business.
Even if banks, firewalls and rescue plans are grabbing the headlines, maintaining and developing our single market remains the bulk of EU decision-making. Not least since the single market entails so many other policies, from technical standards to trade, from competition law to consumer protection. And all this work is obviously done by all 27 members of the Union.
This effort should not be underestimated. Many, many politicians, diplomats and experts in Brussels and elsewhere are dedicated to the never-ending task, of adapting the market to new realities (like the digital age), of going against vested interests, of ensuring that companies can do business across Europe without borders. It is a seemingly endless effort, for good reason. In a constantly changing environment, improving the market is a bit like tending a garden: there will always be work to be done...
Obviously I am fully aware of complaints about Brussels-imposed red-tape and the like... But let me just make two remarks:
First, that these common rules are not "imposed" by the Commission, but adopted by national ministers and MEPs, after careful preparatory work in which British representatives and civil servants have always played a leading part. Second, common rules often means less rules... Britain has always played a leading part in pushing this work forward. Your country has been a motor of a Europe that trades and exchanges, a Europe which opens itself up to opportunities – and comes out stronger. And our Union needs this power for change. In pushing for the single market, in pushing for trade, in pushing for Europe to enlarge and to engage with the world.
A final area where this is true is the European Union's budget. Everyone involved is working to turn it into an investment budget, bringing "better value for money". This is essential given the very tight constraints faced by national budgets – all over Europe... In this "gearing-up period" for EU budget negotiations, I will limit myself to two comments:
First, the fact is that in the absence of an agreement on the next multiannual budget, the Union will by default work with annual budgets, based on current figures. This would actually be more expensive since there will likely be cuts for the new budget.
Second comment. Some Member States will find it hard to come to grips with the idea that countries that supported their entry into the Union after the fall of the Berlin Wall, are those that are now blocking public investment in their struggling economies. Take Hungary, where over 95 per cent of their overall public investment goes to projects that are half co-funded by the EU. We're talking about projects for business, for infrastructure, for skills, which are key to promote growth, and often benefit to British companies investing abroad. As I'll remind each country involved in the negotiations: penny-wise, pound-foolish…
In practice our Union is quite simply: