Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
There are three major red flags for me in this proposal.

The first is the subordination of regulators to "independent," so-called, third party arbitration. Regulators are fundamentally political control functions, and as such should answer first and last to parliament.

The second is the clear intent to further restrict states from imposing conditions upon cross-border money and security market activities. This is a clear destabilizing influence, because whatever they are in life, financial market players are very much national in death. The ability to restrict the movement of money across borders is therefore a vital national security matter.

Finally, I always keep a hand on my wallet and an eye on my constitution whenever somebody mentions "technical barriers to trade," or words to that effect. In the context of the European Union, this is almost always an attempt by the trade branch of the EU bureaucracy to usurp powers traditionally held by the regional development, consumer protection, or interoperability standards branches. And since the trade branch has a materially greater concentration of swivel-eyed neoliberal crazies, this is normally not a good thing.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Jan 17th, 2014 at 06:02:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series