|
Just because we have been favoring the euro over the U.S. dollar in recent
years doesn't mean we believe everything is perfect in Europe. The rejection
of Irish voters of the latest attempt by the European Union (E.U.) to streamline
its decision processes highlights a fundamental weakness: the inability of
European politicians to communicate with its citizens.
| |
| |
Merk Insights provide the Merk Perspective on
currencies, global imbalances, the trade deficit, the socio-economic impact
of the U.S. administration's policies and more.
Don't miss an Insight:
Sign up for our Newsletter
The Archive:
Read past
Merk Insights |
| |
In 2005, Dutch and French voters declared the new European Constitution dead
by rejecting referenda. In the days leading up to the vote in France, their
president at the time, Jacques Chirac, appeared on TV and told his citizens
that it is their duty to approve the treaty and great harm will be done if
anyone dared to vote no. This sort of bullying tactic has been the modus operandi
in France for years; this time around, it didn't work.
With constitutional reform dead, European politicians devised an alternative
to find a way to govern their 27 member states: the Lisbon
Treaty, a reform package that achieves many of the same goals, such as
negating the need for unanimous votes on many issues. Key aspect of this treaty
was that it did not require a referendum to be held in most member states.
The idea is straightforward: if the public cannot be convinced, do not ask
the public.
Now in Ireland, the one state in the European Union many may argue has benefited
the most from membership in the E.U. has rejected the new treaty by referendum;
it's the only state that requires a referendum; parliament decides in the other
states.
Ireland's rejection shows that European politicians simply have not learned
their lesson. A representative democracy can only represent their citizen if
they communicate with them. Politicians must learn to both listen (first) and
speak (second). There is a valid criticism that some U.S. politics may be based
too much on polls, but that does not justify retreating to an ivory tower to
conduct European business. The White House in Washington may be one of the
world's best-known brands; it's a symptom that the U.S. is pretty effective
in communicating with the public. Few know whether European politicians indeed
work in an ivory tower or possibly in a sandstone tower (historic buildings
in Brussels are made out of sandstone). It turns out that the European parliament
meets in both Strasbourg and Brussels; both buildings suggest that they may
be working from a glass cage (link to Strasbourg and Brussels buildings).
The lack of knowledge about European parliament's architecture is just a symptom
of the lack of communication. Laws are passed that then have to be implemented
by member states. In those states, it has become routine to 'blame' Brussels
for any domestic ills. This happens in the U.S. as well, where blame is readily
shifted by states to the federal government. But at least in the U.S., the
federal government is fighting back with its own charm offensive. Depending
on one's political persuasion, one may or may not like what comes out of Washington,
but at least there's a dialogue. There are other challenges in the U.S., such
that too small a portion of the population ever reads or views political news;
but in Europe, where traditional evening news are still far more commonplace,
European politicians fail in relaying their ideas to the public at large.
Voters in Ireland are sending yet another wakeup call to their elected representatives.
Politicians better listen as populist politicians may seize the moment sooner
rather than later to fill the gap.
In the meantime, what does it mean for Europe and the euro? Europe will never
have a legislative and executive branch as effective as the federal government
has in the U.S. Europeans like the resulting stability that most European member
states have learned to cherish; Europeans don't like to have leaders that actually
have power to get things done quickly, as they could overturn long cherished
policies; the flip-side of that approach is, of course, that ill-perceived
policies tend to live on.
Stability must not be mistaken with stagnation, which may result if the E.U.
does not find an effective way to govern. We are not too concerned, as Europe
has been around for a long time and will continue to be around; but we don't
see a reason why Europe must find its way within a year or two - constitutional
reform, even when packaged as "merely" a treaty, deserves to be done right.
And, more importantly, the citizens of Europe deserve to be part of the process.
When we raised similar issues in 2005, I was told that the issues at hand were
too complex to be discussed with the public. When you treat your citizens like
babies, don't be surprised if they throw a tantrum from time to time. More
to the point, our outlook on the euro has not changed; any temporary weakness
may be a buying opportunity, just as it was in 2005.
We manage the Merk Hard and Asian Currency Funds, mutual funds seeking to
profit from a potential decline in the dollar by investing in baskets of hard
and Asian currencies, respectively. To learn more about the Fund, or to subscribe
to our free newsletter, please visit www.merkfund.com.
|