Déclaration de M. Laurent Fabius, ministre de l'économie des finances et de l'industrie, sur le rôle et l'historique de l'euro, les mécanismes préparant le passage concret du franc à l'euro en France au 1er janvier 2002 et l'invitation faite à la Grande-B
Date: 2001-12-07
Orateur: Laurent Fabius
Fonction: FRANCE. Ministre de l'économie, des finances et de l'industrie

Mr Chairman, let me start by thanking you warmly for inviting me today to speak on the euro, a currency that will be in European consumers' pockets in 25 days' time. I will try to tell you what I think will be the possible consequences for European citizens of this major change and what could be the impact on world political trends of the emergence of a brand new currency. Finally, since I am in London, I would like to say a few words about the United Kingdom and the euro. First, I would like to dispel some misunderstandings concerning the past and current level of the euro vis-à-vis the dollar Let me put it bluntly. The euro's track record on the foreign exchange market has not been really satisfactory either for us or for the investors who trusted the single currency from the outset. It has not matched and is still not matching the euro area's fundamentals, especially when compared to other major currencies. Whereas the bulk of market analysts expected a rise in the euro at the end of 1998, it depreciated through to September 2000. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that its level remained higher than the Deutsche Mark lows vis-à-vis the dollar in the eighties. Several factors accounted for this depreciation: from a cyclical point of view, the euro area long suffered from a growth gap vis-à-vis the US. From a technical point of view, the significant success of the euro as a denomination currency on the bond market among non-resident issuers played a part in the erosion of the single currency's external value. Capital outflows also played an important role last year in eroding the euro's value, as European firms were investing massively in US enterprises. If you take a closer look at the most recent developments, you realize that things are changing. Capital outflows have been receding since the beginning of the year. The market's reaction was such that capital dynamics began to slip back even before the tragic events of 11 September. In the euro area, portfolio investment inflows returned to positive in May and totalled more than 50 billion USD as at 1 October compared with 120 billion USD in outflows last year. It has long sounded paradoxical to endorse the euro as a stable currency. Yet this has been largely true of its external value since September, as the Euro has hovered mostly above 89 cents but it has always been true in relative terms of its internal value. The ECB's commitment to price stability provides some room for manoeuvre. It should help speed up recovery. All in all, there is a legitimate question to be asked: why has the euro not been able to edge up beyond the 92-cents level attained immediately following the events of 11 September? One answer is more of a financial nature. The equity rally that started in the last week of September logically favoured the dollar over the euro. Other tentative answers might consider the productivity gap that emerged at the end of the century, the necessity of more structural reforms and also the feeling that the European governments could - and should - still improve their coordination of economic policies. In fact, the main problem is not euro, but Europe. My second point deals with what will happen in the euro zone in a few days' time and what that will mean for European citizens. The introduction of euro notes and coins is a tremendous challenge, probably unprecedented in history. The Euro has thus far remained an abstract notion for most European citizens. It will now become a tangible reality. The euro has often been criticised, especially on this side of the channel, for being a technocratic and fleshless currency. The introduction of euro coins and notes will decisively increase public awareness of the benefits involved and thus greatly encourage the sense of public "ownership" of the new currency. May I underline that Euro benefits can already be felt: the euro has protected European countries from previous interest rate and exchange rate volatility. In the present economic slowdown. The euro is a useful shield against international shocks that undermine growth and employment. The preparations for the full changeover to the euro and the withdrawal of national currencies have been both a European and a national affair, in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity. Indeed, our monetary and currency cultures are very different and entire parts of our national history are immersed in the history of our currencies. Moving from this starting point to membership of the new twelve-country common monetary area has involved various journeys, with each country making its own journey. For instance in France, starting in early 2001, we have attached great importance to cheques, whose frequent use is, as you know, a particular feature of ours: the French write 70% of all the cheques of the Euro zone. France's way preparing for the 1 January 2002 deadline has hence been to distribute chequebooks in euros for mid-year, to stop distributing chequebooks in French francs shortly after, to develop a scenario for the transition to the deposit euro before the arrival of the new notes and coins. Obviously, January lst, 2002 will remain a symbolic date, but familiarising nearly everyone with the euro they will find in their pockets started before. Last week alone, 40% of retail payments were already being made in euros. By the end of December, over 70% of French people will be paying in euros. January lst, 2002, should be an important day, even though the euro has legally been our currency for nearly three years. It will be an important day because it is on this date that the new notes and coins will be put into circulation, paving the way for the withdrawal of the national currencies. This will change our everyday lives. Obviously, it will not all happen in one night. I am thinking here, in particular, of the difficult logistical operation underway to make the new notes and coins available everywhere. In France, some 30,000 tons distributed to retail outlets and throughout the territory. It will open up areas for trading and sharing. It will become clear that the success of the transition to the euro concerns everyone and not just a select few. And we will, I hope, all be proud of successfully making this transition by helping those who find it more complicated. I have been given to understand that this is what you are waiting for before you come to a decision. We will try to be up to this task Anyway I believe that the circulation of the euro will have important effects on the way in which citizens and economic operators relate to the euro, whose overall impact is still hard to predict. No doubt, it will strengthen confidence in euro area business and the single currency. I am confident that we will not see any surge in inflation. All the French surveys support this belief. The circulation of a single currency throughout the twelve countries should encourage growth, even if this growth is initially cautious. It could, for example, help tourism to recover by making it easier to travel within the euro area. The consequences of the introduction of euro coins and notes will not only be felt within the euro area. For instance, the changeover will probably step up the "Euro-creep" phenomenon in the "out" countries. I have read that leading retailers in the UK will accept payment in euros as of 1 January. The UK will probably be enjoying a "common currency" very soon. The Eurogroup has worked very hard on the practical aspects of the euro. The system is in place for the most part. We have implemented security plans. Our preparations are proceeding smoothly. There have been reports of potential strikes in the press. I feel confident that everybody will accept their responsibilities at the appropriate time, but I remain vigilant. I would now like to address a third issue: what a more integrated Europe will mean to the rest of the world. With its new currency, Europe will probably have greater influence and will set an example for more regional integration. The EU has long been more than a customs union or a common market, whatever some may still believe. Following the signature of the Treaty establishing the European Community and subsequent Treaties - the most recent of which was agreed upon in Nice in December 2000 - it has become a real Economic and Monetary Union. Today, this Economic and Monetary Union exists and operates as a practical reality. In spite of difficulties and problems it has demonstrated its effectiveness as an economic power, as a force for stability and as a major player on the economic and financial scene. Since the creation of the single currency, there has been an improvement in the way in which the area operates. We must pay a great attention to the fact that the future enlargement of Europe will not weaken but reinforce this cooperation. It is a decisive issue. Enlargement must not be utilised as a tool to make the Union looser and weaker. Obviously, a lot of improvements are still to be achieved, but I would say that the management of the economy has become more consistent in a somewhat turbulent and unfavourable environment. We have made progress in the area of co-ordination. Each Member State has yet to determine its main economic policy options, but we have constructed a framework for co-ordination that has proved both its usefulness and its flexibility. As you know, this co-ordination is steered by the Eurogroup and by the Ecofin. Within the Eurogroup, we are maintaining a necessary dialogue with the Eurosystem and the ECB, which enjoy full independence in their definition and implementation of monetary policy in the euro area so as to ensure price stability. The Eurogroup and the ECB have proved their growing ability to maintain an appropriate policy-mix in the euro area, given the specific constraints stemming from their being relatively new institutions. This dialogue must be reinforced in the coming years. The swift reaction to the events of 11 September demonstrated our ability to make some policy-mix adjustments, both on the monetary and fiscal fronts. The Stability and Growth Pact is an important tool. I think it ensures the necessary budgetary discipline, but also allows for room for manoeuvre in the event of a cyclical downturn. As trade becomes more integrated, the costs of exchange rate volatility are growing and threatening the benefits of trade integration in terms of growth and economic stability. The creation and development of the single currency should thus be seen not only as the expression of a political will but also, more simply, as a pragmatic response to this very real economic problem. - My guess, my hope, is that the rest of the world will increasingly see the euro zone as an example of successful regional integration One of the main consequences of the euro since 1999 has been to allow Europe to play more of a leading role in G7 debates. This has enhanced Europe's influence. By reinforcing the unity of the euro area, the introduction of euro notes and coins challenges us to pursue the goal of unified external representation. From this point of view, the euro could pave the way for greater monetary integration. East Asia has taken the first steps in this direction. I also understand that current problems in South America are stimulating a debate on the merits of balancing trade integration with forms of monetary integration. It is my strong belief that the world will - and should - be more balanced in the 21st century than at the end of the 20th century. The emergence of regional powers, based on the euro zone model, implies a new balance of power. We can expect to find ourselves living in a more multipolar world. The euro will help us to go into that direction. Lastly, may I add a few words about the prospects of the United Kingdom joining the euro. It is not our intention to interfere with the decision-making process or the internal UK debate. It is obviously entirely a matter for the British people to decide. I am aware of the intensity of the discussions taking place on this issue. I should tell you, however, being a close friend and a great admirer of the UK, that we would welcome a positive decision should the process and modalities decided on by the British government lead to such an outcome. The UK is a major partner in the European Union. Your influence is felt in every single important issue that we discuss in Brussels. Under the leadership of your Prime Minister and my friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the UK is bound to play a crucial role in shaping the future of Europe and helping to address the challenges of the coming decade. We may not agree on all the issues. And, as you are well aware, there are some on which we strongly differ. Yet, even in these instances, we recognise and appreciate the quality of the UK and your Government's contribution to our discussions. Whatever the outcome and your final decision, it will have a significant impact on both the UK and Europe itself. It is a sign of British professionalism and dedication that material preparations are actively underway, both by the British Government and the private sector, to prepare for the event of a positive decision being made. I believe that there are at least two main issues here : Firstly, there are the shared macroeconomic benefits for the euro zone and the United Kingdom. Secondly, there are the political challenges for both the United Kingdom and the euro zone countries. The economic benefits are the more obvious. I think the UK will enjoy the benefits of exchange rate stability. I understand that the UK manufacturing sector longs for such stability. And to be "in" rather than "out" will be of a great importance to your financial industries. Participation in a Monetary Union with a prevailing culture of stability should ensure sustainable growth and end "boom and bust" cycles once and for all. UK growth has been impressive over the last few years. The "exceptional British economy", as a financial newspaper recently described it, is now posting growth rates close to French growth rates. However, we have to consider how such performance can be sustained in more difficult times. The UK's experience can be, in turn, very useful to the euro area. Your transparent monetary framework has been successful, leading to low inflation and enhanced credibility for the central bank. In addition, sterling's strength should not impede the euro at all. Economic benefits there are, but the political challenges should not be underestimated. If, and when the United Kingdom joins the euro zone, changes will be seen in both the UK and the current euro zone countries. This is a sensitive issue, but the balance between market-friendly policies and regulation will probably change on both sides of the Channel. On my side of the Channel, market forces are likely to be allowed greater play and subsequently trigger long-awaited reforms. On the UK side of the Channel, what we call the European model of society is likely to play a more important role, likewise bringing costs and benefits. This cost-benefit analysis should be openly debated on both sides. I hope and believe that the conclusions of this debate will be positive. Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I have spoken a lot about economy, but the euro's action, its vocation, is clearly more than just economic development. The history of the French franc - as well as the Deutsche Mark and the Dutch guilder in obviously different historical contexts - reminds us that all currency creates a social link. The euro will form, and is already forming, links between all European Union nationals. It is an institution that embodies the contract uniting European society, fosters the mobility of people and the intermixing of wealth, and establishes a common measure. By its very nature, a currency stands for innovation, development and abstraction. It never stops shifting and transforming so that it can circulate better. Yet the break marked by the euro is an unprecedented advance. Past monetary unification experiments were all inspired by imperial if not imperialistic thinking, regardless of whether the power was called Rome or Charlemagne. The idea was then to stamp a mark of control over conquered territories, supremacy over defeated neighbours. The empire used currency to better suppress its defeated enemies. Today, monetary unification is a free choice clearly expressed by a number of peoples. It is not the result of a victory by troops over battalions or by one currency over another. It is a collective creation. It shows a shared will to build a strong, peaceful, innovative and united Europe. The euro is therefore both a link between people and a bond between the countries that have adopted it. The euro has changed the function of currency in Europe. From a weapon of war and oppression, it turns into a guarantee of peace and shared development. From an instrument of domination, it changes into an instrument of integration. From a source of rivalry, it becomes a vehicle for solidarity. Fifty years ago, Europe emerged from the shadows and fog into the light. The euro will ensure that this choice is never questioned again. At this start of the 21st century, in this era of globalisation, the nations remain essential, but the appropriate scale is no longer solely at Nation State level, it is also at continental and reference zone level. It is the scale of the world's major regions structured by strong institutions and united by common values. This is Europe's new role. Following the era of reconciliation and the single market, the European Union should now move up to the forefront of helping to govern globalisation. We have a unique European attitude to sustainable development, lifelong learning, environmental protection, the integrity of living resources and the reduction of global inequalities. This attitude is the fruit of both our history and our geography. It is probably our most valuable treasure. It is doubtless our most strategic asset. We need tools and resources to be efficient in governing globalisation. Some have yet to be thought of whilst others are already or virtually here. The euro is one of these. Tomorrow, it will bring our economies closer and will encourage us to implement more co-ordinated growth policies. Tomorrow, it will give Europeans the desire to make more progress together. Globalisation, stability and development need Europe. The euro is now a modern and accomplished face of our Union. The euro is a significant step for the Europeans - but it is more than that, a major leap for Europe. I would like to send this message of sincere friendship and good will to our British friends : join us! (Source http://www.finances.gouv.fr, le 12 décembre 2001)