Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-16-Speech-4-298"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000316.11.4-298"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we have good reason to be puzzled by the European Central Bank’s request to double the ceiling of its calls of foreign reserve assets from the national central banks. At first sight it may seem acceptable to raise the current ceiling from EUR 50 billion – in fact it is 39.5 billion because certain countries have not joined the single currency – to EU 100 billion, when we remember that the national central banks will still have EUR 300 billion of own official reserves available. However, the fact that this operation is to take place so soon after the date when the single currency was launched clearly shows that the value of the reserves was seriously underestimated at the time.
Why? Aside from a few technical explanations relating to details, such as the exact number of ECB staff, there is only one valid reason that can be cited: the euro-optimism surrounding the launch of the euro, as it was called at the time, led people to believe that the single currency would naturally be strong and that the question of reserves was, therefore, secondary. They all seem to be becoming rather more realistic again now. But the whole business is not yet closed, for the explanatory memorandum in the draft regulation, like the explanatory statement in the European Parliament’s report, are rather disturbing, pointing out as they do, in passing, that the aim of raising the ceiling is, and I quote, to enhance the Bank’s “ability to adapt to different possible scenarios”. Since this does not refer to a scenario where the value of the euro is rising – if that were so, there would obviously be no need for additional reserves – it must mean a scenario where its value is falling.
The European Parliament’s report seems even more alarmist when it refers in so many words to the potential instability of the euro which, according to the rapporteur, does not need to be demonstrated. This slip of the pen will no doubt displease Mr Duisenberg who, for his part, keeps reiterating day after day that the euro is fundamentally stable. Yet it is a revealing slip of the pen. For it is, in effect, not realistic to believe that an artificial currency can inspire the same confidence as a currency solidly established among the people."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples