Guidelines for a stable economic and monetary union
Opinion of the former Federal Constitutional Court Judge Prof. Udo Di Fabio
Foundation Chairman Prof. Brun-Hagen Hennerkes calls for an end to low interest rate policy
The Foundation for Family Businesses published an opinion by the former Federal Constitutional Court Judge Prof. Dr. Udo Di Fabio (University of Bonn) today. Under the title „The future of a stable economic and monetary union. Constitutional and European law limits and possibilities“ Di Fabio defined constitutional guidelines for the rescue of the euro and European integration. In the coming week, the Federal Constitutional Court has scheduled a hearing on the pending lawsuits against the rescue of the euro.
For Di Fabio, most of the policy measures taken in the acute debt crisis operate within a legal border zone. For him, it depends very much on whether the guarantees and aids of the rescue of the euro are taken back or expanded.
Di Fabio has examined how excesses of the European Central Bank could be prevented, for example in the form of banned state funding. As a last resort, the Federal Constitutional Court, in his opinion, could even recommend an exit from the euro-zone for the federal government.
Prof. H.C. Brun-Hagen Hennerkes, CEO of Foundation for Family Businesses explains:
1. The establishment of a hazardous waste landfill for the bad risks of irresponsible finance ministers and bankers is not one of the tasks of the European Central Bank. It is not correct that Europe bought itself time to implement the necessary reforms in highly indebted countries with a combination of the purchasing of government bonds and low interest rates. On the contrary: these countries as well as their companies have consistently alligned themselves to this low interest rate policy. Indeed, they are building up great risk in the medium term. Therefore, I consider it necessary that a political reconciliation process be set in motion, similar the one that has already begun in the United States, to see how and when this low interest rate policy can be brought to an end.
2. The euro rescue as such was never negotiable for the German family business. Family businesses as well as German citizens, however, see the process as lacking transparency. What exactly are the liability risks for Germany and its taxpayers that have arisen from the many different previous bailouts, liquidity screens and target balances? We demand that the federal government fully and regularly report to the public on the total amount of all risks.
3. Taxpayers, who are ultimately liable, are not sufficiently represented in the Governing Council of the supreme decision-making body of the European Central Bank. Each country only has one vote in the Governing Council. This is also true for Germany, although it shoulders by far the greatest liability risk - 27 percent of all existing and future obligations. Euro countries such as Malta and Cyprus, however contribute only about one-tenth of one percent and still have the same voting rights as Germany. We demand therefore to weight the votes in the Governing Council, by means of a contract amendment procedure, according to the risk liability of each individual state.
For more information:
Head of Communications and Programs
Prinzregentenstraße 50, D-80538 Munich
Phone: +49 (0) 89 / 12 76 400 06
Fax: +49 (0) 89 / 12 76 400 09