In comments on Philip’s Sunday Business Post article, Bryan G raises a number of important points about what actually changes as a result of the Fiscal Compact. I think an important role for this forum is to discuss what the Compact actually does, so thanks to Bryan for focusing on the question. For one thing, it may reveal areas where clarifications from the Commission are required so informed decisions can be made.
Bryan G identifies what he sees as the major consequences of the Compact:
(a) requiring rapid convergence to MTO [Medium-Term Budgetary Objective]
(b) limiting the scope for temporary deviations due to exceptional circumstances
(c) requirement for an automatic correction mechanism
(d) requirement for Member States that have been made subject to the excessive deficit procedure to put in place budgetary and economic partnership programmes
(e) the ex ante reporting of public debt issuance plans.
(f) defining the scope and procedures for Euro Summit meetings
Points (d) and (e) are the subject of the proposed two-pack. Point (f) seems uncontroversial. I think Bryan G is right that point (c) is a — indeed I would say the — critical element of the Compact, and relates to the requirement to put a correction mechanism into “binding and permanent” national law. From my reading of the proposed Compact and the revised Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), I do not see the case for (a) and (b) being real innovations.