EU Ministers statement on IMF resources

Via 'spiked' and here, this has just been published:

"EU Finance Ministers statement on IMF resources
19 December 2011
EU Member States support a substantial increase in the IMF's resources. These resources will enhance the IMF's capacity to fulfill its systemic responsibilities in support of its global membership, which is especially important given the ongoing economic slowdown and financial market tensions. The IMF’s involvement will be based on normal IMF conditionality.
The EU, and in particular Euro area Member States are fully aware of their special responsibility in the current circumstances. Therefore, on 9 December, euro area Member States have committed to enhanced governance to foster fiscal discipline and deeper integration in the internal market as well as stronger growth, enhanced competitiveness and social cohesion.
Ministers confirmed today that, as part of a broader international effort to improve the adequacy of IMF resources, euro area Member States will provide EUR 150 billion of additional resources through bilateral loans to the Fund's General Resources Account.Burden-sharing among euro area Member States will be based on quota shares resulting from the 2010 quota reform.
The Czech Republic, Denmark, Poland, and Sweden indicated their willingness to take part in the process of reinforcing IMF resources. The United Kingdom has indicated that it will define its contribution early in the new year in the framework of the G20.
For some Member States, commitments will be subject to parliamentary approval.
The EU will also work expeditiously to implement in full the 2010 quota and governance reform of the IMF.
The EU would welcome G20 members and other financially strong IMF members to support the efforts to safeguard global financial stability by contributing to the increase in IMF resources so as to fill global financing gaps." (my emphasis)

It is hoped readers will forgive what may appear to be xenophobia, or nationalism, but:

So the leaders of some European countries, having screwed up their continent economically, now ask the world to save them. Forgive me, but didn't the leaders of some European countries screw up their continent militarily, about 70+ years ago, for the same empirical aims? So the UK has to join with others to save them - again? To paraphrase: when will they ever learn? More importantly - and perhaps selfishly - when will our politicians learn?

I stand to be corrected, however it appears there are only three 'avenues' by which the eurozone can be 'saved'. One is through the EFSF, which is an avenue not being used this time; the European Central Bank (ECB), which doesn't have the required funds; or the IMF, which providing it can raise the funds, would have. Whether Britain would contribute, via the G20, is the intriguing question and it seems to me that Cameron and Osborne, who have been stating that survival of the eurozone is paramount to our country's well-being, may well use this 'avenue of last resort' in order to appear to be 'good Europeans', thus 'saving face' following their 'belligerence' during 'Events Bruxelles' of 8/9th December - and thus 'getting their feet back under the table'.*

We shall see what transpires.................**

* Of course, if we had 'Referism' and 'Direct Democracy' any payment by our country to another would not be the decision of politicians!

** If I'm proved wrong in my belief that we eventually do contribute via the IMF, then needless to say I shall don sackcloth and ashes, pleading many 'mea culpas' in the process.

 

Not more money to the IMF.........

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard and Louise Armitstead, writing in the Daily Telegraph, link to the fact that Britain may be liable for yet another 'bung' to the IMF; a story to which Helen, Your Freedom and Ours, links. This relates to a statement given by Barroso to the European Parliament about decisions made at the meeting of Heads of State on 8/9th of December, from which:

"EU leaders will decide soon on whether to provide the IMF with up to €200bn more to help debt-stricken eurozone countries."

Helen is quite correct when she writes that there was no mention of this small matter by Cameron when he 'reported' to the House of Commons on that meeting. For the record, this is the Hansard report of his opening statement, one that contained the words: "Let me take the House through the events of last week". By his omission of that little snippet from 'the events of last week' might one accuse Cameron of having misled the House of Commons?

Now I may be a tad confused, however I seem to recall Cameron making much play of the fact that Britain would no longer be liable for bail-outs to eurozone countries after 2013 under the EFSF coupled with the fact I also seem to recall that that was the date when the ESM was to become operative. Herman van Rompuy is on record as stating that he wishes the 'so-called 26' to agree 'terms' so that they can be implemented in March 2012, which one can logically assume is when the ESM will become operative. He also tweeted earlier today "@euHvR I will convene an informal meeting of the 27 heads of state or gov. in Brussels. Date to be decided: end of Jan.- beginning of Feb. 2012", a tweet timed at 13:30. Presumably it will be at that meeting that the decision will be taken by the EU Leaders to 'donate' that €200bn.

Cameron may well believe that IMF resources are for countries not currencies, and that they can’t be used specifically to support the euro, however that form of words is just semantics, is it not? It is worth recalling the €50billion would be 'split' between the remaining 10 non-euro member states. Any bets that Cameron won't pay up?

Just asking...................

Mixed message?

Osborne was very specific in his Commons statement that British taxpayers' money would not be used for the new Greek bailout, neither would it be put towards any special IMF package for the eurozone. Unfortunately that doesn't mean we can avoid further costs arising from our obligations to the IMF. He repeated his promise of two weeks ago, that "Britain stands ready to consider the case for further resources and contribute with other countries if necessary". (Now that is an offer that Christine Lagarde will probably grab with both hands). Yet just hours later Guido Fawkes tweets that the "first CCHQ press release from new Econ Sec Chloe Smith attacks Ed Balls for not wanting to send more money to the IMF to bail out €urozone."

The phrase: "Get your acts together, boys and girls" springs to mind.

Just saying.................

And the difference is.........?

Way back in 1987 Ron Paul said:

"The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people."

Now substitute 'Westminster' for 'Washington'..........

Protect our liberty: European Union? Not coddle the world: overseas aid? Precipatitating no-win wars: Iraq, Libya? Bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil: EFSM, IMF, PFI, Socialism, EU membership?

Well, Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron - what say you........?

Now can we change the bloody system of democracy under which we live........?

Just asking...........