|
|
Remarks by J. Dijsselbloem following the Eurogroup meeting in inclusive format of 4 December 2017
Welcome again. In this second Eurogroup today in an inclusive format we discussed the future of EMU, to prepare December Euro Summit.
Let me try to summarize the discussion among ministers after having listened to the institutions in our meeting.
What we need to do is to prepare a decision-making in June next year and a possible way forward would be to come to an agreement on a roadmap for deepening of the monetary union. Now, having said that, we need to be careful that we don't just put a roadmap on top of a roadmap, on top of a roadmap. So, I would say two things about that. First of all, we should start - and there was very broad support in the group on this - from the roadmap for the banking union that was agreed by all in 2016. First of all, to deepen it, to be more precise. The Commission, on our request, has put forward a very good paper, on the work done so far, on the banking union. The issues that are still being worked on and the work that we still need to do. The Eurogroup could pick up on that, in the beginning of next year, to develop the roadmap for the banking union deeper, to be more precise on the specific steps that need to be taken in terms of risk reduction. This would unlock next steps in terms of risk sharing. But also that agenda would have to be broadened: it is not just about the banking union, but also about fiscal issues and the role of the ESM. I would also think that, in June next year, there shouldn't just be a broaden and deepened roadmap but also some decisions, if possible, on first steps. I think the credibility of the whole process would be strengthened if we could achieve that. And the Eurogroup needs to do the work.
So the way to structure the work I think could be to have a discussion to specify the roadmap on the banking union: be very specific on what the next steps are. We would need to have more in-depth discussion on new fiscal instruments. There are many different ideas here - from some who don't see any purpose to different colleagues who have different ideas about the purpose of the fiscal instruments. Also the size of the instrument and how it would have to be designed. All of that really needs in-depth discussion at political level; and I think it should be done in Eurogroup/Ecofin or Eurogroup in an extended format.
Secondly on fiscal, we have an ongoing discussion on the complexity and effectivity of our fiscal framework. My sense is that we in general terms all agree: it should be credible, it should be effective and it should not be so complex. But we have not succeeded to make progress on this and a possible way forward would be to ask a independent experts' working group to come forward with an advice along those criteria.
On the ESM, one of the possible first steps for the banking union could be the issue of creating a backstop to the Single Resolution Fund. As I said last time, there is quite a broad support for the ESM to play that role. But I could imagine that, on a number of topics like the banking package that the Commission has put forward, or all the efforts put in to deal with NPLs, we would have to make some progress in the coming half year - and I think it is possible. It would then possibly open the opportunity for a decision on the backstop to the resolution fund. And here many of us are looking at the ESM. There is also broad agreement that the ESM should have an important role in financing, designing, monitoring programmes, together with the Commission. I could imagine that the Commission and the ESM would come forward with a joint approach, a draft agreement, on how they could do this together in the future - who would do what. I think that would be a very practical way forward to give clarity on that specific role of the ESM.
Finally as I said, on fiscal instruments, more in-depth discussions will be needed. That will also regard the EU budget, if you think of instruments from the EU budget or EU credit lines from the budget that will have to be part, inevitably, of the multi-annual framework debate, which already will be complex, due to Brexit. The same would go for the need of the so-called European public goods, which many of us feel should have a more prominent place in the budgeting at European level. This is another ambition that needs to be put into the whole multi-annual framework. Another approach would be some kind of financing instrument from the ESM. But this will require more discussion.
So along these three lines, aiming at a broader and deeper roadmap to guide our work in the coming years, the Eurogroup has some very practical work ahead - difficult work, but it can be done. I think today's discussion outlined the work that we need to do for the Leaders to be able to have a sound discussion and perhaps make decisions in June.
Eurogroup statement on the Draft Budgetary Plans for 2018
The Eurogroup welcomes that 18 Member States have submitted Draft Budgetary Plans (DBPs) for 2018. On 22 November, the Commission has provided in-depth individual assessments and Opinions, together with an analysis of the budgetary situation in the euro area as a whole. The Eurogroup underlines the importance of a timely and meaningful multilateral examination of the draft budgetary plans and invites the Member States to provide the draft budgets and the Commission to provide its assessments as soon as possible to allow for an in-depth discussion in the Eurogroup and its preparatory committees.
The Eurogroup takes note that no DBP was found in particularly serious non-compliance with the SGP and consequently no resubmission of a DBP was requested by the Commission. We note that Germany, Austria and Spain have submitted DBPs on a no-policy-change basis. We invite them to submit the updates of their DBPs as soon as possible and look forward to the Commission assessment of those updates. We also recall that Greece was not assessed as part of this exercise as it is subject to a macro-economic adjustment programme.
The euro area is enjoying broad based economic growth, although crisis legacies persist in some areas. According to the Commission autumn forecast, the aggregate deficit in the euro area is expected to further decline to 0.9% of GDP in 2018 from 1.5% of GDP in 2016. Aggregate debt in the euro area is also set to be on a downward path, from 91% of GDP in 2016 to 87% of GDP in 2018. A broadly neutral fiscal stance appears still appropriate at the aggregate euro area level in 2018. At the same time, the improving economic conditions call for the need to rebuild fiscal buffers, while continuing to strengthen the growth potential of our economies.
The Eurogroup notes that a slow pace of debt reduction from high levels in a number of Member States remains a matter for concern and should be decisively addressed in the current favourable economic situation. In this context, the limited structural fiscal adjustment expected in 2018 in some Member States is worrying, in particular when coupled with high sustainability risks. The Eurogroup recalls in this context that the focus on debt reduction is an integral part of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) and calls upon the Commission and the Council to apply the SGP in full. The Eurogroup underlines that fiscal policies should be pursued in full respect of the Stability and Growth Pact, thereby taking into account stabilisation needs and sustainability concerns. The Eurogroup also recalls the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Council on 11 July 2017 which include detailed and quantified fiscal policy guidance.
The Eurogroup remarks that Member States are in very different budgetary situations. The Eurogroup takes note that, based on the Commission assessment, the following Member States' plans are deemed to be at risk of non- compliance with the SGP in 2018: Belgium, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia and Austria – under the preventive arm of the SGP and France – currently under the corrective arm of the SGP, assessed under the assumption of a timely and durable correction of the excessive deficit. According to the Commission assessment, the DBPs of these Member States might result in a significant deviation from the adjustment path towards their respective MTOs. In addition, Italy, Belgium and France are also not expected to comply prima facie with the debt reduction benchmark in 2018. The Eurogroup invites all these Member States to consider in a timely manner the necessary additional measures to address the risks identified by the Commission and to ensure that their 2018 budget will be compliant with SGP provisions.
Based on the Commission assessment, the following Member States' plans are deemed to be broadly compliant with the SGP in 2018: Estonia, Ireland, Cyprus, Malta, Slovakia – under the preventive arm and Spain under the corrective arm. The Eurogroup invites these Member States to ensure compliance with SGP provisions within the national budgetary processes and welcomes their commitment to take any necessary measures.
The Eurogroup welcomes that a number of Member States' plans are deemed to be compliant with the SGP in 2018: Germany, Lithuania, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Finland, all under the preventive arm. The Eurogroup notes that Member States having outperformed their medium term objectives could use their favourable budgetary situation to prioritise investments to boost potential growth while preserving the long-term sustainability of public finances.
The Eurogroup recalls the importance of a growth-friendly composition of public finances across the euro area. In this regard, the Eurogroup took stock of progress made by some Member States in the reduction of the tax burden on labour in line with the benchmarking agreement of September 2015 and encourages Member States to continue their efforts in this field, while ensuring full compliance with the SGP.
The Eurogroup welcomes the ongoing work to explore more country specificity in the commonly agreed methodology for output gap estimates. We will continue to monitor euro area Member States' fiscal and economic policies, as well as the budgetary situation of the euro area as a whole.
|
| 4/12/2017 |
Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communication (BEREC): Council agrees its position | |||||||||||||
On 4 December, Council agreed its position (general approach) on updating the rules for the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communication (BEREC). This agreement paves the way for negotiations to begin with the European Parliament.
"“We are currently in the middle of a fundamental overhaul of the EU telecommunication rules: negotiations with the European Parliament are underway on the European Electronic Communications Code. BEREC’s tasks are closely interlinked with the content of the Code and today’s agreement helps us to progress on both fronts. We will discuss these two files with the Parliament already on 6 December, to move swiftly with the issues that are central to the Digital Single Market strategy.”"
Urve Palo, Estonia's Minister for Entrepreneurship and Information Technology
In its position, the Council has ensured that the new rules proposed for BEREC are in line with its mandate on the Code. The Council proposes to maintain the existing management structure and allow relevant national competent authorities to be represented at expert level. The position sets out BEREC's tasks and responsibilities and improves its operating framework, with an emphasis on independence and transparency. Negotiations with the Parliament will run in parallel with talks on the Electronic Communications Code. Negotiations on both dossiers are therefore expected to be concluded together.
Building on the existing European Regulators Group (ERG), BEREC was established in 2009 and started work in 2010. Its main goal is to ensure the consistent implementation of telecoms rules across the EU and provide technical expertise to national regulators and the EU institutions. It also promotes the availability and take-up of very high capacity connectivity, and encourages competition in the electronic communications sector.
|
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου