"How the EU recovery fund amounts to an invisible transfer of power"
New article by @pietercleppe https://www.brusselsreport.eu/2021/05/03/how-the-eu-recovery-fund-amounts-to-an-invisible-transfer-of-power/ #NGEU #EURecoveryFund #EU #EuropeanUnion #VonderLeyen

On Friday, The @Economist described the new EU #recoveryfund as a "proto-Treasury", noting: "In exchange for a share of €750bn ($895bn) in grants and loans, EU governments must overhaul their economies in line with Brussels-approved plans" @duncanrobinson

It adds that the “temporary” scheme may very well become “permanent”, citing the likes of EU Commissioner @PaoloGentiloni

In a separate feature, Belgian magazine @Knack highlights the bureaucracy involved with the disbursement of EU recovery fund cash, something which can be partially justified, given the risk of fraud and misuse of funds.

However, the recovery fund also provides the “ #EuropeanSemester” (a largely non-binding EU process to coordinate national economic and fiscal policies) with binding teeth, as governments must adopt its non-binding recommendations in order to receive EU recovery fund money.

It’s important to realise that the “European Semester” does not merely serve as a tool for the EU to promote responsible budgetary policies, which is how it was initially sold, but that it includes recommendations affecting sensitive national policy choices.

The key question here is what the legitimacy is for the supranational EU policy level to affect sensitive policy choices, something which really should be the preserve of national democratic debate.

Countries will be made liable for jointly issued EU debt, but to get that money, they’ll need to comply with conditions set with limited democratic legitimacy. For governments acting as effective “net payers” to the “recovery fund” (NL, Germany etc), that's even harder to justify