International

Outgoing president of the Dutch national bank (De Nederlandse Bank) Nout Wellink has had a great deal to say for himself this week. He wants, for example, emergency financial aid to Eurozone countries no longer to be subject to unanimous decision, which would mean that the government of the Netherlands could no longer object should the country be obliged to contribute to new loans or funds. In my opinion this shows contempt for the most basic principles of democracy, one of which is that the citizen, as he or she pays taxes, should have a say in how these are spent. This is typical of the arrogance of bankers in general, who know that in recent years they have had more power than have the people’s representatives. Now that they face more criticism, they are showing their true face, a face of arrogance and contempt. It is time then that concrete plans were made to rein in their influence. And when it comes to renewed aid, the Netherlands must in my view never give up our veto right.

Throughout the world bankers have been doing pretty well for themselves. The financial markets have at the same time, through all of the automation, become so speedy and so large-scale that speculators can attack, with greater ease, not only individual firms but entire countries. That’s what we’re seeing in the Eurozone, where a growing number of member states are forced to pay ever higher rates of interest on their bonds, which brings ever more problems. This goes not only for Greece, Portugal and Ireland, but for Spain, Italy and Belgium, which have also been the subject of attacks. Admittedly, each of these countries is experiencing economic or political difficulties, but these are made much worse by speculation. From fear of such speculative attacks, governments feel obliged to push through plans even when the majority of the people are opposed to them.

In this way a situation develops in which it is not the citizens via their national parliaments who determine policy, but the speculators. In the whole of the discussion around the Greek crisis it is striking how nobody speaks about the need to address the financial system itself. Where are the proposals for splitting the banks or reintroducing a state-controlled bank, which would at least be trustworthy? Where are the proposals for binding rules restricting bonuses? For a Tobin tax on international financial transactions and a banking tax so that in the future banks themselves would have to take the blows?

You won’t hear Wellink criticising himself. His only target for criticism is the slow pace of decision-making by government leaders, which is thus a criticism of our democracy. This is arrogance par excellence. Not that you can expect much from this government or from Brussels, but that should not relieve us of the duty to stress, in both European and national parliaments, that if we don’t tackle the financial sector, we will be handing ourselves over to the diktats of bankers.

In Brussels I’m trying actively to counter the speculators’ lobby. On 30th June the inaugural meeting of Finance Watch will take place, and with a number of like-minded MEPs I’ll be doing my bit to establish this new organisation, whose goals include launching an enquiry to bring to light the speculators’ lies, as well as making proposals to restrain their power. These are all small steps, but I’m convinced that more and more people are sick and tired of what the likes of Wellink are saying. Surely we won’t let a bunch of speculators put an end to our democracy?