Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance: impact on the eurozone and the rule of law - European Scrutiny Committee Contents


1  Introduction

Background

TEMPORARY STABILITY MEASURES

1.  In May 2010 there was a first response to a gathering sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone, caused partly by a crisis in the banking sector. The main elements of this were the EU's European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM), established under Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and the European Financial Stabilisation Facility (EFSF), a special purpose vehicle established by an intergovernmental agreement between the eurozone Member States and funded by them.

2.  The EFSM gives financial assistance to a Member State in the form of loans or credit lines raised from capital markets or financial institutions guaranteed by the EU Budget; the guarantee is up to a level of €60 billion (£50.64 billion). The continuing need for the EFSM is to be reviewed every six months, and it is to be discontinued once the exceptional circumstances cited as justification for it no longer exist.

3.  The EFSF can issue bonds or other debt instruments on the markets to raise funds for loans to eurozone Member States. Bond issues are backed by guarantees, allowing a loan capacity of €440 billion (£371 billion), given by eurozone Member States in proportion to their share in the paid-up capital of the European Central Bank. The EFSF is to expire in June 2013.

4.  Support for eurozone Member States in difficulties under these arrangements can be complemented by assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

5.  To date Greece, Ireland and Portugal have received bailouts:

·  Greece's first, three year, bailout package, agreed in May 2010 (outside the EFSM and EFSM mechanisms), consisted of €80 billion in bilateral loans from eurozone Member States and €30 billion from the IMF;

·  Greece's recently agreed three-year bailout package includes €109.1 billion from the EFSF and €28 billion from the IMF (over four years);

·  Ireland received a three-year loan package of €85 billion in November 2010, comprising €22.5 billion each from EFSM, EFSF and IMF, plus bilateral loans from Denmark, Sweden and the UK; and

·  Portugal received a three-year loan package of €78 billion in May 2011, comprising €26 billion each from EFSM, EFSF and IMF.

A PERMANENT STABILITY MEASURE

6.  In October 2010 the European Council agreed that the EFSM and EFSF should be replaced by a European Stabilisation Mechanism (ESM), "a permanent crisis mechanism to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area as a whole",[1] to be established and financed by the eurozone Member States. It was also agreed that a limited revision of the EU Treaties would be necessary to bring the ESM into effect. Accordingly, in March 2011 the European Council adopted, under the simplified Treaty revision procedure,[2] a Decision amending Article 136 TFEU, which allows the eurozone Member States to establish by intergovernmental treaty a permanent stability mechanism (the ESM) "if indispensable to safeguard the stability of the euro area as a whole".[3] The Decision has still to be ratified by several Member States, including the UK, and is to come into effect on 1 January 2013.

7.  During 2011 the eurozone Member States only agreed an intergovernmental treaty to establish the ESM. This was to come into effect on 1 January 2013 but, because of the scale of the crisis, was subsequently amended to come into effect in July 2012.[4] The ESM will have an effective lending capacity of €500 billion (a figure it has recently suggested should be increased), but it will also seek to supplement its lending capacity through the participation of the IMF in financial assistance operations. In his evidence to us on 14 March, the Financial Secretary to the Treasury described the ESM as "a firewall, with €500 billion of funds there to act as a brake and prevent contagion from spreading. It is a helpful way of trying to resolve the crisis in the eurozone, and one to which we do not have to contribute".[5]

A "SIX PACK" OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS

8.  In parallel to these support measures, the EU adopted the so-called "Six Pack" of EU legislation on economic governance in October 2011. This package of legislation, based on existing provisions in the EU Treaties, is intended to strengthen the fiscal stability of Member States and introduced measures for the surveillance and correction of macroeconomic imbalances similar to those applying to fiscal deficits in the EU's Stability and Growth Pact. And, like the coercive measures in the Stability and Growth Pact's excessive deficit procedure, the "Six Pack" provides for coercive measures in an excessive macroeconomic imbalance procedure to be applied to eurozone Member States.

AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ON FISCAL DISCIPLINE AND ECONOMIC INTEGRATION

9.  By Autumn 2011 there was renewed pressure on the eurozone to come up with further responses to contain the financial crisis. The absence of enforceable measures to improve fiscal discipline and economic integration prompted the Euro Summit in October 2011 to call for the first time for the possibility of "limited Treaty changes"[6] to be explored in time for the December 2011 European Council. Germany in particular wanted fiscal discipline to be enforceable through the Court of Justice. At the European Council on 9 December the eurozone Heads of State or Government accordingly proposed new rules on a "fiscal compact" and strengthened economic policy coordination. As was widely reported, the UK exercised its veto at that meeting to prevent the EU Treaties and institutions being used to this end. This is recorded in the Statement of the eurozone Heads of State or Government as follows:

    Some of the measures […] can be decided through secondary legislation. The euro area Heads of State or Government consider that other measures should be contained in primary legislation [the EU Treaties]. Considering the absence of unanimity among EU Member States, they decided to adopt them through an international agreement to be signed in March or at an earlier date. The objective remains to incorporate these provisions into the treaties of the Union as soon as possible.[7]

10.  On 2 March 2012, 25 Member States signed a non-EU intergovernmental Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union (the SCG Treaty). The contents of the SCG Treaty are summarised in the box following this chapter. In outline its purpose is to further strengthen the fiscal and economic discipline of the Stability and Growth Pact and the "Six Pack" legislation. For eurozone Member States access to the ESM will be dependent on compliance with the SCG Treaty.

The inquiry

11.  On 19 December 2011 we announced our inquiry into possibilities for reinforcing the eurozone following the December 2011 European Council. In calling for evidence we said that we intended to examine:

·  how the resolution of the eurozone crisis was developing and the possible consequences for the UK;

·  how to reconcile monetary and fiscal policies within the eurozone, based initially on the Statement of 9 December 2011 by the eurozone Heads of State or Government, with the legal and institutional constraints; and

·  the Government's position on such monetary and fiscal policies within the potential confines of an intergovernmental agreement.

We received 16 written submissions and took oral evidence on four occasions. Those who helped us as witnesses were: Professor Paul Craig, University of Oxford, and Professor Simon Hix, London School of Economics; Charles Grant, Director, Centre for Economic Reform; Professor Michael Dougan, Liverpool Law School, and Martin Howe QC; Wolfgang Münchau, President, Eurointelligence ASBL and Associate Editor of the Financial Times, Douglas McWilliams, Chief Executive, Centre for Economic and Business Research, and Roger Bootle, Managing Director, Capital Economics; Mr David Lidington MP, Minister for Europe, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and Mr Mark Hoban MP, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, together with their officials. We are grateful to all who assisted us in our inquiry, although we were hindered by the refusal of the Foreign Secretary and the Chancellor of the Exchequer to do so.

12.  During the inquiry we looked at seven broad questions. Two were primarily legal:

·  whether the SCG Treaty was compatible with the EU Treaties, particularly in relation to the roles conferred on the Commission and the Court of Justice; and

·  what were the dangers for the UK in the SCG Treaty's encouragement of enhanced cooperation, particularly with regard to taxation measures?

Three were primarily economic:

·  whether the SCG Treaty would work, in terms of ending the eurozone crisis;

·  what it implied for Member States with severe fiscal difficulties; and

·  if the SCG Treaty did not work, what the consequences might be for the eurozone, the UK and the wider world?

And two were primarily political:

·  what the consequences might have been for the UK in ratifying the SCG Treaty; and

·  what might they be in standing aside from that Treaty?

Additionally, late in the inquiry our attention was drawn to a question as to whether amendment of Article 136 TFEU was a necessary precursor to setting up the ESM.
Summary of the SCG Treaty

Treaty provisions

Article 1 concerns purpose and scope, which are to strengthen the economic pillar of the economic and monetary union (EMU) by fostering budgetary discipline through a fiscal compact; to strengthen the coordination of economic policies; and to improve the governance of the eurozone, "thereby supporting the achievement of the European Union's objectives for sustainable growth, employment, competitiveness and social cohesion".

Article 2 requires that the SCG Treaty be interpreted and applied in conformity with the EU Treaties, with reference made to the principle of sincere cooperation laid down in Article 4(3) TEU, and with EU law (secondary legislation, decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union), and that the EU Treaties and EU law take precedence in the event of a conflict.

Articles 3 and 4 establish the balanced budget rules for the "fiscal compact, namely that:

·  national budgets should be balanced or in surplus, with the annual structural deficit (the balance between government tax receipts and current expenditure, adjusted for change in the business cycle) at the country-specific medium-term objective being no greater than 0.5% for contracting States that have a debt-to-GDP ratio of over 60%, and no greater than 1% for contracting States whose debt is below this mark;

·  contracting States may temporarily deviate from their medium-term objectives only in exceptional circumstances, defined as:

an unusual event outside the control of the Contracting Party concerned which has a major impact on the financial position of the general government or to periods of severe economic downturn as set out in the revised Stability and Growth Pact;[8]

·  there must be a correction mechanism triggered automatically in the event of significant deviations from the medium-term objective or the adjustment path towards it; and

·  when the ratio of a government's debt to GDP exceeds 60% it must reduce it by one twentieth of the difference between the present ratio and the 60% target each year.

Article 3(2) requires contracting States within a year of the SCG Treaty coming into force to put in place the rules in the above paragraph (with the exception of the last) "through provisions of binding force and permanent character, preferably constitutional, or otherwise guaranteed to be fully respected and adhered to throughout the national budgetary processes."

Article 3(2) further provides that the automatic correction mechanism is to be implemented nationally "on the basis of common principles to be proposed by the European Commission".

Article 5 requires a contracting State subject to an excessive deficit procedure under the EU Treaties to put in place a "budgetary and economic partnership programme", containing a detailed description of the structural reforms to be followed. The content and format of such programmes will be set out in EU legislation, and they are to be monitored by the Council and the Commission.

Article 6 requires contracting States to report ex-ante to the Council and Commission their borrowing (public debt issuance) plans.

Article 7 commits eurozone States to voting in the Council in support of the Commission's recommendations against a eurozone State which it considers to be in breach of the deficit criterion in the framework of an excessive deficit procedure, unless a qualified majority is against the recommendation (a "reverse qualified majority").

Article 8(1) and (2) set out the enforcement mechanism for Article 3(2):

·  the Commission will issue a report to each contracting State assessing whether it has fully transposed Article 3(2);

·  if the Commission, after having given the State concerned the opportunity to submit its observations, concludes in its report that a State has failed to comply with Article 3(2), the matter will be brought to the Court of Justice by one or more of the contracting States;

·  in addition, where a contracting State considers, independently of the Commission's report, that another State has failed to comply with Article 3(2), it may also bring the matter to the Court of Justice;

·  in both cases, the judgment of the Court of Justice shall be binding on the parties in the procedure;

·  in addition the complainant contracting State may request that the Court of Justice impose financial penalties on the State in breach of Article 3(2), in line with the powers of the Commission under Article 260 TFEU; and

·  the Court of Justice may fine a State in breach of Article 3(2) if it concludes that the State concerned has not complied with its judgment. The maximum fine is 0.1% of the State's GDP, which shall be paid into the ESM for eurozone States and the EU Budget for non-eurozone States.

Article 8(3) states that Article 8 constitutes "a special agreement between the Contracting Parties within the meaning of Article 273 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union".

Articles 9 to 11 concern economic policy coordination and convergence. Under Article 9 contracting States undertake to "work jointly towards an economic policy that fosters the proper functioning of the economic and monetary union and economic growth through enhanced convergence and competitiveness", with the objectives of "fostering competitiveness, promoting employment, contributing further to the sustainability of public finances and reinforcing financial stability."

Under Article 10 the contracting States:

stand ready to make active use, whenever appropriate and necessary, of measures specific to those Member States whose currency is the euro, as provided for in Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and of enhanced cooperation, as provided for in Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union and in Articles 326 to 334 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on matters that are essential for the proper functioning of the euro area, without undermining the internal market.

Article 11 requires the contracting States to ensure that all major economic policy reforms that they plan to undertake are discussed ex-ante and, where appropriate, coordinated among themselves. "Such coordination shall involve the institutions of the European Union as required by European Union law."

Articles 12 and 13 concern governance of the eurozone. Article 12 contains provisions for informal meetings of heads of State or Government and the President of the Commission in the newly created "Euro Summit", and for the appointment of its President. The Euro Summit will meet at least twice a year to consider issues arising from the single currency, and "other issues concerning the governance of the euro area and the rules that apply to it, and strategic orientations for the conduct of economic policies to increase convergence in the euro area". The Euro Group will be responsible for preparing Euro Summits, and implementing their conclusions. The President is to keep other Member States (including the UK) and the European Parliament informed of the outcome of Euro Summit meetings.

Article 13 states that, "as provided for in Title II of Protocol (No 1) on the role of national Parliaments in the European Union", the European Parliament and national Parliaments "will together determine the organisation and promotion of a conference of representatives" of the relevant committees of the national Parliaments and of the European Parliament "in order to discuss budgetary policies and other issues covered by this Treaty."

Articles 14-16 (Title VI) concern general and final provisions. Article 14 states that the agreement will enter into force on 1 January 2013 if 12 eurozone States ratify it, or the first day of the month after the 12th ratification if earlier. Article 15 states that non-eurozone States can ratify the agreement. Article 16 states that "steps shall be taken" to incorporate the agreement into the legal framework of the EU within five years at most.

Arrangements for bringing a case to the Court of Justice under Article 8

Annexed to the Minutes of the signing of the SCG Treaty on 2 March was a document entitled "Arrangements Agreed by the Contracting Parties at the time of signature concerning Article 8 of the Treaty".[9] It has not been published on the Council's website, nor made available by the Government. It lays down the following procedure:

·  the Trio of Presidencies (the previous, current and subsequent presidency Member States) will lodge an application with the Court of Justice for a declaration that a contracting State has failed to comply with Article 3(2) within three months of the receipt of the Commission's report to that effect;

·  so long as i) the Trio States have not been found to be in breach of their obligations under Article 3(2) of the Treaty by a Commission report, ii) they are not otherwise the subject of proceedings before the Court of Justice under Article 8(1) or (2) of the SCG Treaty, and iii) they are not unable to act on other justifiable grounds of an overarching nature, in accordance with the general principles of international law;

·  if none of the three States concerned meets these criteria, the duty to bring the matter to the Court of Justice will be assumed by the members of the former Trio of Presidencies, under the same conditions.[10]



1   See para 2 of the European Council Conclusions of 28-29 October 2010, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/117496.pdf. Back

2   The simplified revision procedures are set out in Article 48(6) of the Treaty on European Union. Back

3   See Annex II, page 21, of the European Council Conclusions of 24-25 March 2011, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/120296.pdf. Back

4   See para 13 of the Statement by the eurozone Heads of State or Government of 9 December 2011, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/126658.pdf. Back

5   Q 203 Back

6   See para 35 of the Euro Summit Statement of 26 October 2011, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/125644.pdf. Back

7   See p 7 of the Statement by the Eurozone Heads of State or Government of 9 December 2011, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/126658.pdf. Back

8   See Article 3(3)(b), http://european-council.europa.eu/media/639235/st00tscg26_en12.pdf. Back

9   http://www.europolitics.info/pdf/gratuit_en/310236-en.pdf Back

10   The Government said these arrangements were a political agreement, which did not have the force of international law. By contrast, Professors Craig, Dougan and Peers thought they were drafted to create legally binding obligations. Back


 
previous page contents next page


© Parliamentary copyright 2012
Prepared 3 April 2012