Fiscal Treaty

littlemac1980

This morning on Newstalk, Minister for Agriculture, Food and Marine, Simon Coveney said that a 'Yes' vote in the upcoming Fiscal Treaty, would 'Ensure that no Irish Government could make a reckless budget ever again'.

To me that's a very sly way of saying that this Country will never be free to budget for itself ever again. Is that what the upcoming treaty is about?

Does anyone have any clear understanding of what the treaty involves?

Also, Coveney ended the Interview by saying that 'unless this Treaty is passed the Government and this Country will be in Big Trouble'.

Is it just me or is there an unconstitutional flavor off such a statement being made on National radio by a member of the current Government? It kind of sounds like a threat.

Any thoughts? Or am I just suffering from Monday-morning-itis?

Predalien

As far as I'm aware none of the fianna fail/pd budgets would have been contrary to the rules of the fiscal compact, since most of them recorded a surplus/small deficit... so I'm not sure what he's saying in that regard. The fiscal compact still allows for a country to run a deficit of 3% of GDP. It however provides little room for stimulus during an economic dip (particulartly at a europe wide level) so does almost enshrine austerity as the means for dealing with fiscal crisis, which arguably has been a failure so far. To be honest I don't understand the necessity for the treaty since the rules on budget control have always meant to apply to the eurozone, it's just that the EU was happy to accept promises from countries (to facilitate their entry to the euro) like Greece that they would get their budget under control, even where the chances of that happening were very low. What should have happened was budget control first, then entry to the Euro, not the other way round.

coylemj

Predalien wrote: »

..... the rules on budget control have always meant to apply to the eurozone, it's just that the EU was happy to accept promises from countries (to facilitate their entry to the euro) like Greece that they would get their budget under control, even where the chances of that happening were very low. What should have happened was budget control first, then entry to the Euro, not the other way round.

++1 They got it the wrong way around, this was the fatal flaw in the Euro project from the start. Bad enough that they let the Greeks in after they cooked the books to qualify, they then turned a bind eye while they ran up a massive defecit and almost brought the house crashing down.

At least the Irish had the illusion of a property boom to justify borrowing vast amounts of cheap money, the Greeks simply went on a spending spree, including the 2004 Olympics which has left them with a legacy of empty stadia designed for sports which in many cases are not played in that country so were destined to be mothballed even before they were built.

This by a country which produces practically nothing, where almost nobody pays any taxes and where foreign companies who want to win government contracts have to splash backhanders all over the place to civil servants who can retire in their 50s on full pension.

Procrastastudy

coylemj wrote: »

This by a country which produces practically nothing, where almost nobody pays any taxes and where foreign companies who want to win government contracts have to splash backhanders all over the place to civil servants who can retire in their 50s on full pension.

I got confused about which country you were talking about here! :P