John Pinder and Simon Usherwood explain the EU in plain readable English. They show how and why it has developed, how the institutions work, and what it does - from the single market to the euro, and from agriculture to the environment.
Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Economics - Monetary theory and policy, grade: 1,0, University of Northampton, course: European Policy Issues, language: English, abstract: On 1.January 1999 the European single currency, the Euro, was officially introduced. At that point eleven member states wanted to be a part of this significant leap and fulfilled the necessary criteria determined by the Growth & Stability-Pact (GSP) in 1997. Greece as the twelfth member joined in 2001. On 1.January 2002 the Euro was distributed and became the single currency for the partaking countries. This date marked only the final step in a long history of desire for a fixed exchange rate system and a monetary union within Europe – with a single currency as the summit of this ambition. In this essay I want to analyse if a single currency is a good thing for the EU and what the drawbacks are respectively. Later I will deal with the question if the UK should join the Euro soon – if at all. ...
THE TOP TEN SUNDAY TIMES BESTSELLER Geography comes before history. Islands cannot have the same history as continental plains. The United Kingdom is a European country, but not the same kind of European country as Germany, Poland or Hungary. For most of the 150 centuries during which Britain has been inhabited it has been on the edge, culturally and literally, of mainland Europe. In this succinct book, Tombs shows that the decision to leave the EU is historically explicable - though not made historically inevitable - by Britain's very different historical experience, especially in the twentieth century, and because of our more extensive and deeper ties outside Europe. He challenges the orthodox view that Brexit was due solely to British or English exceptionalism: in choosing to leave the EU, the British, he argues, were in many ways voting as typical Europeans.
The Nobel Prize–winning economist and best-selling author explains why saving Europe may mean abandoning the euro. When Nobel Prize–winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz posed this question in the original edition of The Euro, he lent much-needed clarity to a global debate that continues to this day. The euro was supposed to unify Europe and promote prosperity; in fact, it has done just the opposite. To save the European project, the euro may have to be abandoned. Since 2010, many of the 19 countries of Europe that share the euro currency—the eurozone—have been rocked by debt crises and mired in lasting stagnation, and the divergence between stronger and weaker economies has accelerated. In The Euro, Joseph E. Stiglitz explains precisely why the eurozone has performed so poorly, so different from the expectations at its launch: at the core of the failure is the structure of the eurozone itself, the rules by which it is governed. Stiglitz reveals three potential paths forward: drastic structural reforms, not of the individual countries, but of the eurozone; a well-managed dissolution of the euro; or a bold new system dubbed the “flexible euro.” With trenchant analysis—and brand new material on Brexit—The Euro is urgent and timely reading.
2008 marks the tenth anniversary of the creation of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the setting of conversion rates between the currencies of the original participating countries of the eurozone. Since then the euro has been introduced in fifteen Member States with negligible transition costs. This report examines the structure and governance of the eurozone institutions and developments in the eurozone economy in the past ten years, including the management of inflation and the impacts on trade and economic growth. The primary conclusion is that the young currency has made a positive start to its life but that, based on the experience to date, it is too soon to state what the future holds. Other conclusions include: The ECB has gained public acceptance and market credibility, has run a credible price-stabilising policy in the euro area and is performing its primary role of maintaining price stability effectively. The introduction of the euro has been a major influence on increased trade both within the eurozone and with other countries, and it has stimulated integration in parts of the capital market. The euro has become an important reserve currency, and has established itself with remarkable speed as a widely accepted transactions currency. The euro has resisted external shocks to date, and does not face any foreseeable likelihood of disintegration. None of the fears, expressed at the time of its launch, about a divisive or negative impact on European economies has been borne out. Its existence has contributed to economic development and low inflation in the eurozone.
This book for children (roughly 9 to 12 years old) gives an overview of Europe and explains briefly what the European Union is and how it works.--Publisher's description.
This study into the consequences and politics of monetary union includes contributions from Otmar Issing, Deutsche Bundesbank, Vaclav Klaus, the prime minister of the Czech Republic, Allan Meltzer, AEI and Carnegie Mellon University, and Paul Mentre, the Commitee for the Monetary Union of Europe.
Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) will have far-reaching consequences for participating nations. This book contains a unique and editorially neutral collection of key arguments favouring and opposing membership. The economic and policy implications are evaluated by distinguished economists, whilst the impact upon national sovereignty and the world of work is debated by prominent MPs and representatives of business and trade union organisations. The text provides an unbiased, comprehensive and 'readable' resource for specialist students and a general readership.
The UK spends approximately £1.23 billion each year on aid through the European Union, approximately 16% of the UK's total aid budget. Only 46% of this aid, however, goes to low income countries - a figure that MPs say is 'unacceptable'. Instead middle income countries bordering Europe are benefiting. Turkey has consistently been in the top five recipients of European Commission aid (223 million euros in 2010) as has Serbia (euros 218 million in 2010). The Committee is calling on the UK Government to press for funding to be diverted, away from higher middle income countries bordering Europe, to give greater help to the poorest people in the world. In order to make this happen, the MPs say Ministers must challenge and change the definition of Official Development Assistance (ODA). It appears to be being used as a way of fudging the figures to help other European countries meet the target for 0.7% of GDP to be given as aid. The Committee recognises that there are a number of advantages to giving aid through the EU but identifies a number of problems with the way EU Development Assistance works. Overall, the European Commission has improved its performance over the last decade and has recently proposed further improvements to development policy in An Agenda for Change. The Committee supports a number of these proposed changes, but it does have concerns that conditionality should not hurt the poor for the sins of their governments