Judging from media reports on the introduction of the euro across Europe on 1 January 2002, the whole event was about shopping.
|
The main point of interest seemed to be whether citizens in the 12 euro nations would be able to pay for goods in their new currency. Journalists besieged cashpoints and coffee shops to see if consumers would take to the euro. And at London branches of Marks & Spencer, bemused staff were asked by reporter after reporter whether they could pay with euros. No wonder many journalists ended up interviewing each other about how they found the new coins and notes.
|
But it would be wrong to blame the banality of the discussion on poor journalism alone. The obsession with the euro's impact on shopping reflects the broader depoliticisation of economic issues. In continental Europe, as in the UK, key economic questions are now considered to be the concern of technocrats rather than subjects for political debate.
|
Continental Europe's technocratic new regime can be seen in the way that interest rates are set. As part of the process of economic integration, the European Central Bank (ECB) sets rates in all the countries participating in the euro project. The ECB is 'independent', in the sense that it is meant to act on its own expertise rather than responding to political pressure.
|
The setting of interest rates might sound like a technical issue, but it is a key element of economic policy. Monetary policy is one of the main ways in which the authorities can influence economic conditions - yet it is now considered a virtue that such decisions are made by unelected bureaucrats instead of elected politicians.
|
The influence of the ECB goes further than monetary policy. When signing up for the euro, participating countries had to accept strict 'convergence criteria' on such key areas as government debt, interest rates and inflation, and were not allowed to enter the euro system unless they gave up autonomy on such issues. Under a 'stability pact' they must maintain adherence to strict controls once they are in the system.
|
So the impact of the new European monetary system is to move large areas of economic policymaking outside of even the pretence of democratic control, with the underlying assumption that bureaucrats know best. And the mass of the population need not concern themselves with such matters - we should just enjoy the freedom to buy goods in the same currency across Europe, without having to worry about how the economy is run.
|
This system might sound familiar to anybody who lives in Britain. Because despite the supposedly heated debate about Europe, a similar trend towards technocratic control over economic policy has taken hold in the UK.
|
One of the first acts of the New Labour government following its election in 1997 was to announce the establishment of an 'independent' Bank of England. Interest rates would be set by the bank's Monetary Policy Committee rather than by the elected chancellor of the exchequer who is answerable to the House of Commons. The stated aim was again to insulate monetary policy from political pressures, which were routinely derided as 'short term'.
|
So it shouldn't come as a surprise that the discussion about whether Britain should join the euro system is also being conducted on a technocratic basis. Chancellor Gordon Brown's now famous 'five economic tests' on joining the euro are all narrowly technical; relating to such issues as the impact on employment, financial services and investment. The possibility of having a broader public debate on the merits of European economic integration is entirely alien to the chancellor's approach. Brown makes the creation of a pan-European currency for over 300million people sound on a par with choosing the right mortgage or investing in a new car.
|
The narrowness of the UK government's approach was captured earlier in January 2002 - when government officials reacted angrily to a senior treasury official who told students that the decision about the euro might be partly political. According to the government, the decision would be made on an entirely economic rather than a political basis.
|
There is a new consensus that while technocrats make economic policy, the rest of us should be happy with the freedom to shop. Such a banal emphasis on consumption is an inevitable outcome of the depoliticisation of economic debate. They are - pardon the expression - simply two sides of the same coin.
|
Daniel Ben-Ami is the author of Cowardly Capitalism: The Myth of the Global Financial Casino, John Wiley and Sons, 2001 (buy this book from Amazon (UK) or Amazon (USA)). He is also a contributor to Cultural Difference, Media Memories: Anglo-American Images of Japan, Continuum International Publishing Group, 1997 (buy this book from Amazon (UK) or Amazon (USA)).
Read on:
spiked-issue: The economy
Euro vision, by Jennie Bristow
|
