brussels-cardsThe Brussels region has been considerably improving its supply of public transport and right now it has valid options of car-sharing and bicycle-sharing.

The STIB (Société des Transports Intercommunaux de Bruxelles) is the largest urban public transport company in Belgium and supplies the city with buses, night buses, trams and metros. In 2003 it launched the Cambio car-sharing with great success and right now there are Cambio car-sharing stations all over Belgium and in Brussels there is a big supply that allows many of us to happily live without a car. However no common card Cambio+Stib exist and you need one for every different service.

Then in 2009 the company JCDecaux won the license to develop a bike-sharing system in the Brussels region. In partnership with the region and Brussels mobilite this company that has already successfully implemented similar systems in cities such as Paris or Lyon is quickly expanding its presence in the European capital. The bicycles are not as cute as others but they are solid and do the work. This bike-sharing system seems to be expanding all over the world, however having been one of the first “Villo-people” in Brussels I can say that the deployment of the bike-sharing is still far from being finished and still lots of work has to be done by the company to make sure some stations are not left without bicycles during most of the time, but things are improving. The problem again is: you need another card for Villo.be!

I wonder how can it be that in these times of multifunctionality, when a mobile phone can serve as radio or a calendar or when a computer can be used as a TV, how can it be that it is not possible to produce a single card which would allow access to STIB, CAMBIO, VILLO and maybe even other transport services. Any modern ID card could easily integrate all these functions.

The problem is clearly not technical, the STIB has integrated cards for transport and museums,  but a matter of either lack of will or lack of demand from the consumers. It is undeniable that even though STIB, CAMBIO and VILLO are different companies it would clarify the concept of “sharing” if the region would ask all of them to produce an integrated card.

In the meantime I’m afraid I’ll have to keep on carrying the three different cards plus the card of the supermarket, of brico, miles and more, privilege customer of I don’t know what store and whatever else is needed to have access to all these wonderful services.

 
Why the EU needs to reflect on the role of the euro in world politics

The monetary policy is an exclusive competence of the eurozone of the European Union, yet it is unclear what role the European currency is to play in the world, in comparison to other important currencies, or what is the strategy of the EU regarding the current reshuffle of world power relations. Even more worrying is the fact that in the current discussions on the programme that the European Commission should implement during the next 5 years not a single word is mentioned about this issue which, if excluded, on its own, can do away with all the EU’s efforts to get out of the crisis.

In any normal state the currency is one of the main tools of foreign policy, for devaluation can increase exports, for it can attract or repel investments or when used as reserve currency it can help finance national debt. Any remotely good school of economics teaches its students that the equilibrium of balance of payments is one of the most important tools for the stability of a country. The EU seems to have forgotten that even though it is not a state, having a common currency means that it needs to act as if it were one when it comes to using monetary policy with its relations with the world.

Indeed, most of the trade of the EU countries takes place within the EU which might give the false impression that the role of the euro as tool of foreign policy is not that important. Are we, Europeans, reading the historical moment we find ourselves in correctly?

The 20th century has seen the rise and consolidation of the US as the world superpower which has been interlinked with the establishment of the dollar as the world currency. The current economic crisis, with the US decline and the emergence of new world powers, is leading towards a multipolar world and this will result in a new world monetary order which will re-shape economics, internal policies and international relations for years to come. During the last decades the US has been exploiting the condition of the dollar as a reserve currency to run colossal deficits in its trade and current-accounts with which it has financed its economy and has managed to keep its status of the world superpower. This time it looks like the dollar domination is over and during next years most probably we will assist to the birth of a new monetary world order.

We are observing how the continuous depreciation of the dollar is having devastating effects in the reserves of most world countries which are held in this currency. Most importantly, countries such as China which have huge surpluses in their trade account with the US see the fate of their economies linked to the strength of a currency whose strength diminishes whilst being forced to buy US debt to avoid further devaluations of the dollar.

Paul Kennedy in his article published in the New York Times on 28 August rightly pointed out two facts which signal an important change: during the G20 meeting in London of April the IMF received an allocation of 250 billion $ in Special Drawing Rights (SDR) and two months later a meeting of the BRICs –Brazil, Russia, India and China- debated shifting currency holdings from the dollar to these IMF units of account in order to diversify risk.

The debate on the post-dollar era and with it the new world monetary system is something that is happening, even if the EU wants to ignore it. We are assisting to the most important change in world monetary policy since 1944 when in Bretton-Woods John Maynard Keynes proposed the creation of a “bancor”, a world currency unit based on the average price of 30 commodities, and the US opted for a monetary system based on the gold standard linked to the dollar which effectively turned the dollar into the world currency. Back then nobody could challenge the strength of the American currency, fair image of the then most powerful world economy. This is no longer the case and the emerging economies don’t want to see its efforts to develop go up in the air with the destruction of its reserves whilst continuing to finance the US economy.

The United States have a clear interest in keeping the status quo in the world monetary relations, since this allows them to get their economy financed by the rest of the world. The Chinese have an interest in changing the rules of the game but they are not against the dollar per se because they indeed have most of their reserves in this currency. However they do understand that if things go bad and the Americans start printing money to finance their way out for the crisis this will lead to inflation and subsequently to a depreciation of the dollar which will decrease the value of the chinese reserves and do away with their development effort of the last decade. A similar reasoning applies for other emerging economies such as India or Brazil.

Also the European Union is and will continue to be severely affected by this constant depreciation of the dollar, since the comparative strength of the Euro will render the European exports more expensive and hence move jobs and economic activity out of the EU. There is a lot at stake for the EU in this game and if we look at the current state of affairs and the discussions taking place between the European Commission and the European Parliament on next years programme, it seems that neither have a clear understanding of the stakes in the game.

What should the role of the EU be in this new monetary world order? There are some reasons why the EU should take the lead in proposing a new system:

First and foremost, because it is easier to push for an equitable, democratic and transparent system in a multipolar world than in a polarised world. History teaches us that the predominance of a currency tends to be proportional to the power of the country that issues it. The end of the US hegemony will bring with it the end of the dollar hegemony and the new multipolar world will bring with it a new distribution of power that will be reflected in the monetary strength. Now is the time when emerging economies can agree to a compromise, in 10 years it might be too late. It is strategically important to take advantage of the moment to work out a plan from which all can benefit in the years to come. China may join a world system today but it won’t do it once it is doped with the taste of power.

Secondly, as indicated above because the current status-quo damages the competitiveness of the EU and unless it is reversed it can seriously harm the recovery of the EU economy. If we add a strong exchange rate and political disunion in monetary policy to the lack of a coordinated recovery plan and the inability of the EU to properly finance itself we have the ingredients for a troublesome future.

Thirdly and finally because if the EU doesn’t take (or join) the initiative the world will move on without and the cost of hopping on the train once it has started moving will be higher than being in the vanguard. Clear signs that the train is moving is when in March this year Zhou Xiaochuan, head of the Chinese central bank, called for an overhaul of the global monetary system by replacing the dollar for a world unit composed of a basket of the most important currencies (SDR). As explained before the talks among the BRICs after the 250 billion $ in SDR given to the IMF to guarantee stability also show a tendency.

The EU, except some timid initiatives taken by the French presidency a year ago, did not react to these declarations and signs and instead we continue to behave like if we were in the 20th century.

At present the EU 27 holds most of the voting power in the IMF and if acting together it could even decide to move the siege of the organisation to Europe. This simple example shows the power that the EU still has, although not for long, in influencing world monetary policy. The EU‘s weight in the IMF is disproportionate to its economic and demographic size and it will be corrected soon.Why not taking advantage of the last moments “in power” to give the right steps to create a more representative, fair and above all stable and robust monetary system? Isn’t it in our interest? The euro can not and should not be the new world currency; instead the European experience of monetary integration could be very useful for the setting up of a new world monetary system based on SDR. Why does Europe stay silent when the status quo is harming European interests?

The eurozone has delegated competence in monetary policy and the council can decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the European Commission: it is therefore in the hands of the European Executive to put together the EU monetary plan. Ideally, the newly elected president of the European Commission should seize initiative and put the European Union at the forefront of these crucial negociations for the world governance. The role of the euro in the new world monetary order should have a prominent place in the program that Barroso will present for approval in front of the European Parliament together with the new European Commission in December 2009 or January 2010.

May the Barroso program fail to tackle this vital point for the future of Europe, the European Parliament should better start looking for another candidate to lead the EU executive.

 

vineyardAhir al mercat de St Giles (Brussel.les) vaig comprar 3 kg de raim italia fantastic per dos euros i una senyora pinya del Senegal per un euro. Com ens recorda l’Oriol “todo necio confunde valor con precio” aixi que no entrare en valoracions sobre que val un gra de raim o una pinya, doncs el valor sera diferent per cadascu de nosaltres, pero el preu el trobo un disbarat.

Belgica no es un pais barat per  la fruita si el comparem amb Franca o Holanda, i no cal dir que aixo no es el tropic i aqui no hi creixen pinyes. De raim, gracies al canvi climatic, se’n comenca a cultivar a Walonia. Tanmateix, quin mon es aquest en que li pot sortir a compte al productor d’oferir al consumidor aquests productes a aquests preus quan segurament nomes les despeses de transport, l’intermediari, el marge del distribuidor i altres drets d’importacio (no tenint en compte el preu ecologic de consumir productes tropicals al nord d’Europa) es deuen endur el 90% del preu total deixant 10 centims per kg (si arriba) pel productor.

Els economistes segur que ens podran donar una explicacio logica del perque aixo passa i fins i tot perque es bo que aixo passi.

Per les persones normals aixo no te ni cap ni peus.

 

belgiumrollersI’ve been a passionate supporter of the Brussels rollerskate parade www.belgiumrollers.com since 5 years. Thanks to the rollers parade I managed to skate thousands of km in this otherwise ill-prepared city for skaters and cyclists.

However, something that from the beginning has surprised me is how the opportunity to promote green transport and practices in these congregations is being missed. The parades are lead by a hummer and a 4WD which run on LPG -see pic- which is all very well because this Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) reduces around 20% the CO2 emissions in comparison with a normal car in petrol. But for heaven sake, the consumption of such an irrational and mad machine as the Hummer is still of 24 liters per 100km in the city!

So, the logo claiming to be riding green is nothing less than greenwashing and being severely misleading as it is the organisers should make a point in replacing it by a normal car with capacity to carry a couple of good speakers. The ideal solution -if they want to use a car for it- would be to get an electric car running on clean electricity powered by Lampiris. It will help reduce the consumption, the noise, the pollution, it will not stink -if you skate after the car or even during the breaks the skaters are inhaling the fumes of this thing- and it will allow them to correctly brand themselves as “we ride green”.

One more thing that can be improved from the environmental impact point of view is the disposal of the bottles of water given by the sponsor evian to the sweaty rollers -also the cans from Redbull-. Even though Evian as a company has some good environmental credentials the truth is that they are really committed with the environment they should make sure that the bottles they distribute are collected and recycled. Having participated in many of the roller events I can assure that all these bottles are not separately collected and I would bet more than 80% of them end up in the Brussels incinerator. Therefore it would be good if Redbull or Evian would ask the organisers to take care of the collection of the waste produced by the parade. I’m sure the rollers themselves would be happy to collaborate and it would really be preaching by doing which would be a lot more effective than just sticking the label “we ride green”.

The season of  belgianrollers will be finishing in two weeks. Let’s hope next year the organisers plan these things better and improve this great initiative to give the city to the skaters for some hours.

 

Having read the program of Barroso and having listened to the debate today (15/09/09) in the European Parliament, and regardless of the result of the vote of tomorrow where most likely he will be confirmed with the new mandate, I can only say one thing: this man is talking to the wrong audience!

When he speaks about Europe taking the lead,
When he speaks about the need of a strong commission in a strong Europe,
When he says that Europe needs a serious transparent budget giving the EU the capacity to raise its own resources,
When he talks about common immigration policy, coordination of R&D, European recovery package, green economy, regulation of financial markets…

When Barroso talks about all this in the European Parliament he is preaching to the converted. The European Parliament has already expressed several times, and many times even before the European Commission, about the need to bring more Europe in all the abovementioned topics.

If this didn’t happen it was not because the EP didn’t want to, or the European Commission was not aware of it… they didn’t happen because the European Council and the council of ministers, guardians of the national interests, have been extremely reticent in letting go in these fields.
If we don’t have a stronger European Commission –let alone an European Government- is because the European Council insists in treating the commission as a secretariat of the Council and prioritises putting weak politicians to manage it,
If the EU has such a tiny, non-transparent, subject to national bargain budget is because the member states prefer to spend money at national level even when that is economically inefficient and politically wrong,
If we don’t have a common immigration policy, or a true European research strategy, or we don’t have a serious European recovery plan or we don’t have the necessary investment in green economy to get out of the crisis it is not because the EP or the Commission don’t want to, it is because member states continue to think they can do better apart than together!

The EP and the European Commission are the two communitarian institutions “par excellence” and this facilitates the understanding of many issues for they deal with them everyday. The real problem is the European Council where the heads of state and prime ministers meet to bargain about their national interests and where the EU is very seldom the winner. The discussions in the European Council are of very low level and our heads of state and prime ministers, not understanding what their real role is, only try to get as much as they can back home.

I put my hand on the fire that not a single member of the European Council has followed the debate in the European Parliament. Even the Swedish presidency sent the minister for EU affairs Malstrom and not its prime minister.

For all this I reiterate my conclusion with a pledge to Mr Barroso:

Dear Jose Manuel,
Convincing the EP is peanuts, in fact your program is a copy-paste of many of the European Parliament policies and decisions. Now, please go and explain all what you presented in the EP to the European Council, present them your program and see what they say. It is in the European Council where you will find the real problem for the future ambitions of Europe. As you well know, there is where the power and the money are and they are the people that will decide whether you can become the leader you want to be or stay their mere secretary.
Let us know how it goes, the fate of Europe depends on it!

 
© 2012 JM Simon Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha