The "Oui" campaign is trying to push for European economic stagnation along the Franco-German model wheras the "Non" campaigners are trying to push for a more complete Soviet style economic collapse.George at EU-Rota correctly points out that:
Since before 29 May columnists have opined that a Yes vote would speed much needed economic and labor reforms in Europe. Where is the proof of this? In the run-up to the elections Chirac offered up nothing of the sort which would even hint at economic and labor reform.
Quite the opposite in that Chirac offered nothing but a pale version of the No camp's insane economic rhetoric based on the failed fossilized social-humanist model*. Who favored a Yes for Anglo-Saxon economic reasons? (cue crickets)
In the short-run the No will be disasterous to the ideas of economic growth, labor reform, and job growth. This is a good thing. Had the Yes side won it would have been more years of countless half-measures leading nowhere, as promised by Chirac.Since the Non campaign won economic collapse is on the cards. De Villepin's 100 days challenge will undoubtedly involve him spending July and August getting his back passage nicely flexible and lubricated so that it can take on the demands of the trade unions when they (threaten to) go on strike in September (note to self - must see if I can place a bet on how many days strikes will occur).
Jean-Claude Trichet, ECB president, departed last week from the usually cautious language of central bankers to urge Europe's consumers to open up their purses. Stressing the ECB's commitment to price stability, he said: "You can trust us. If you have the intention to embark on an increase in consumption and you are still hesitating because you have some lack of confidence, you can do it - perhaps it is time to consume."If nothing else the "non" votes showed that European voters - who are of course also consumers - simply don't trust the assurances of their leaders which is why, one suspects, said voters/consumers are voting with their wallets until it is clear just how screwed up things are going to get. Meanwhile the "Central banker award for stating the blindingly obvious" appears to belong to the ECB in perpetuity:
...Mr Trichet said recent economic data had "heightened the uncertainties" about the outlook for domestic demand. The ECB believes responsibility lies with governments to push through structural reforms, especially those that would increase labour market flexibility.
It fears that the expanding fiscal deficits of some eurozone countries are simply adding to the nervousness of consumers, boosting saving not spending. In its latest economic forecasts, the ECB expects the savings ratio - the proportion of incomes saved - to rise slightly over this year and next, partly because of "concerns about the development of public finances and the longer-term prospects for public health and pension systems".PS if anyone wondered why Jean-Claude Juncker is so keen on the EU constitution then the FT's profile of him today lets the cat out of the bag:
As well as capturing the job of political Mr Euro, he also had his sights set on becoming the first full-time president of the European Council. Unfortunately for Mr Juncker, that post will not be created unless he can find a way of saving the EU constitution.