Nowa publikacja
Poniżej tekst pt. Against Stagnation, który ukazał się w wydawanym w Londynie wolnorynkowym periodyku The Eye on Europe. Uwaga, wersja po angielsku.
Against Stagnation
In the debate on the future of the European Union, Poland would not welcome a superstate. Such a body would have the potential to change this dynamically developing country into traditional European bureaucracy with a stagnant economy.
Reading European press, I see the Polish position on the European Constitution is misunderstood. Yes, Poles are not happy to be members of yet another superstate: for many citizens the EU looks like more market-oriented Soviet Union. No, Poles are not against Europe: everyone sees profits from the Common Market and liberalisation in many areas, which bring consumers such benefits as better services and cheaper prices.
Integration presents key political challenges, the biggest of these being the loss of autonomy. People know that if a political agenda is pushed over economic growth, its easier to regulate the market to achieve political goals. That is why the voting system adopted by the EU is so important for politicians from all the EU countries and Poland is no exception. The EU voting system, introducing a double-majority principle based on the countries? population, is designed to favour the biggest players. Europe has bad historical experience with such leadership.
Polish society is preoccupied with political correctness. In such a traditional society socially progressive legislation on abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality is seen as an affront to morality. The European Treaty has the potential to be used to expand the socialist-dominated monopoly on ethics.
Sovereignity is closely connected with legislative power. If European law becomes more important than national law, a power struggle could emerge due to shared sovereignity. In 2006 the Globalization Institute asked the Polish Committee of European Integration what proportion of Polish law is inspired by Brussels: the answer was a shocking 98,5 per cent.
Harmonisation of domestic and EU law is not a bad thing if it encourages competition, but it certainly is if it transfers power from local to central government. The main danger of the European superstate is the potential to regulate the economies of all member states. Poland has already suffered from EU market regulations.
Under the CO2 European Trading Scheme, Brussels limits Polish industry by imposing caps on production and energy consumption. Bureaucrats dictates how much Polish fishermen can fish and also tells local shipyards how many ships they can build in years to come. That is why many citizens fear that the next step will be suggesting the taxes we are obliged to pay or how entrepreneurs should reward their workers.
Centrally planned economies are not the way to create wealth. These practices may simply change dynamic, developed countries into the typical European state facing economic stagnation. Many of the European regulations are designed to limit the competitiveness of the new EU members, using such slogans as ?social dumping? or ?unfair competition?. There are, however, benefits too. Certain goods are now cheaper because of beneficial tariffs and competition has improved in some areas.
The average economic growth in Europe has dropped from 4,9 per cent in 1960?s to 0,9 now. If the EU wants to develop dynamically we need even more internal competition and less regulations. These policies could be thwarted by the European Treaty, which has already been rejected by Dutch and French voters.
Now the EU constitution is returning with little more than a name change in the form of the Treaty Reforming the EU. According to Open Europe, this is 96 per cent the same document. The European Treaty has social goals and furthermore has features which clearly demonstrate superstate leanings with its centralisation of internal policy, law and incoming currency monopoly. The biggest problem with the treaty is that this document does not meet society?s expectation. Citizens? wants are often exactly the opposite of politicians?. Politicians are primarily concerned with increased power and re-election, citizens want less political wrangling and increased deregulation of the economy.
The common market as a free-trade area without political goals is the most desired and logical way forward for the EU. That is why constitutional referenda are for politicians too big a risk. If we have to abandon democracy to introduce the Treaty is it really the right thing for Europe?
Dr. Tomasz Teluk is the president of the Globalization Institute, free market institute based in Poland and the Fellow in the Centre for the New Europe.
Against Stagnation
In the debate on the future of the European Union, Poland would not welcome a superstate. Such a body would have the potential to change this dynamically developing country into traditional European bureaucracy with a stagnant economy.
Reading European press, I see the Polish position on the European Constitution is misunderstood. Yes, Poles are not happy to be members of yet another superstate: for many citizens the EU looks like more market-oriented Soviet Union. No, Poles are not against Europe: everyone sees profits from the Common Market and liberalisation in many areas, which bring consumers such benefits as better services and cheaper prices.
Integration presents key political challenges, the biggest of these being the loss of autonomy. People know that if a political agenda is pushed over economic growth, its easier to regulate the market to achieve political goals. That is why the voting system adopted by the EU is so important for politicians from all the EU countries and Poland is no exception. The EU voting system, introducing a double-majority principle based on the countries? population, is designed to favour the biggest players. Europe has bad historical experience with such leadership.
Polish society is preoccupied with political correctness. In such a traditional society socially progressive legislation on abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality is seen as an affront to morality. The European Treaty has the potential to be used to expand the socialist-dominated monopoly on ethics.
Sovereignity is closely connected with legislative power. If European law becomes more important than national law, a power struggle could emerge due to shared sovereignity. In 2006 the Globalization Institute asked the Polish Committee of European Integration what proportion of Polish law is inspired by Brussels: the answer was a shocking 98,5 per cent.
Harmonisation of domestic and EU law is not a bad thing if it encourages competition, but it certainly is if it transfers power from local to central government. The main danger of the European superstate is the potential to regulate the economies of all member states. Poland has already suffered from EU market regulations.
Under the CO2 European Trading Scheme, Brussels limits Polish industry by imposing caps on production and energy consumption. Bureaucrats dictates how much Polish fishermen can fish and also tells local shipyards how many ships they can build in years to come. That is why many citizens fear that the next step will be suggesting the taxes we are obliged to pay or how entrepreneurs should reward their workers.
Centrally planned economies are not the way to create wealth. These practices may simply change dynamic, developed countries into the typical European state facing economic stagnation. Many of the European regulations are designed to limit the competitiveness of the new EU members, using such slogans as ?social dumping? or ?unfair competition?. There are, however, benefits too. Certain goods are now cheaper because of beneficial tariffs and competition has improved in some areas.
The average economic growth in Europe has dropped from 4,9 per cent in 1960?s to 0,9 now. If the EU wants to develop dynamically we need even more internal competition and less regulations. These policies could be thwarted by the European Treaty, which has already been rejected by Dutch and French voters.
Now the EU constitution is returning with little more than a name change in the form of the Treaty Reforming the EU. According to Open Europe, this is 96 per cent the same document. The European Treaty has social goals and furthermore has features which clearly demonstrate superstate leanings with its centralisation of internal policy, law and incoming currency monopoly. The biggest problem with the treaty is that this document does not meet society?s expectation. Citizens? wants are often exactly the opposite of politicians?. Politicians are primarily concerned with increased power and re-election, citizens want less political wrangling and increased deregulation of the economy.
The common market as a free-trade area without political goals is the most desired and logical way forward for the EU. That is why constitutional referenda are for politicians too big a risk. If we have to abandon democracy to introduce the Treaty is it really the right thing for Europe?
Dr. Tomasz Teluk is the president of the Globalization Institute, free market institute based in Poland and the Fellow in the Centre for the New Europe.
« Home