【經濟日報╱編譯 吳國卿】
2010.11.22 03:21 am
英國政府顯然準備測量我們的快樂程度。別偷笑—這是很嚴肅的事。快樂是大事一件，尤其是對經濟學家來說。心理學家兼諾貝爾經濟學獎得主卡尼曼（Daniel Kahneman）曾深入研究這個主題。另兩位諾貝爾經濟學獎得主沈恩（Amaryya Sen）和史提格里茲（Joseph Stiglitz），也為法國總統沙克吉研究衡量經濟幸福的標準。歐巴馬總統已任命快樂專家—桑斯坦（Cass Sunsten）、史蒂文森（Betsey Stevenson）和克魯格（Alan Krueger）擔任高級官員。(英國首相）卡麥隆就算沒帶頭衝鋒，也算跟上了潮流。
諷刺的是，卡麥隆在提議測量全國人的心情時，似乎誤判了大家的心情。他的中間偏右核心支持者對政府贊助的福祉研究似乎不太領情；中間偏左份子原本就傾向支持這個點子，但他們現在都有點鬧脾氣，對卡麥隆的任何提議很難笑得出來。
到底卡麥隆提議什麼？國家統計局現在還不願透露詳情，只說必須尋找「更廣泛」和「更全面性」的標準以衡量福祉和進步，而非只專注在國內生產毛額（GDP）。這有一部分可能牽涉衡量「主觀幸福感」。
懷疑者的反應是，政府要給我們一劑麻藥Soma，讓我們快樂地邁向儉約英國的美麗新世界。但實情平淡無奇多了，幸好我懂快樂經濟學，所以我能翻譯。經濟活動的標準衡量是GDP，國家統計局只是想提出這個主題的一些變異—可能包括環境破壞、浪費時間在玩電腦、「非市場工作」（例如洗盤子）的價值等調整因素。這些變異GDP使用相同架構，但添加了額外的因素。除此之外，統計局可能蒐集其他衡量健康、不平等的資料，以及「主觀幸福感」這種新奇的項目。
這又是什麼？答案之一是，經濟學家偏好「主觀幸福感」勝於「快樂」。有一次我訪問克魯格談這個主題，他堅定地告訴我，他喜歡用主觀幸福感這個名詞，因為「快樂聽起來太輕浮」。
主觀幸福感事實上不神祕，國家統計局可能只要在既有的調查中多加幾個問題，有些可能問到失眠或焦慮，目的是尋找抑鬱的跡象；有些可能問及心情：「你今天覺得多快樂—很快樂、快樂、沒有快樂也沒有不快樂、不快樂、很不快樂？」最後還有一個非問不可的問題，牽涉整體生活的滿意度。
華威大學（Warwick Unviersity）經濟學家兼福祉專家歐斯華（Andrew Oswald）說，能詢問快樂各個面向的問題是好事。當然他說的對：在既有的調查上多問幾個問題的成本很低，而且這個主題顯然很重要。
歐斯華讚許卡麥隆的這個構想。反對這個構想會讓人覺得你不安好心，但我還是覺得整個計畫被過度吹捧。英國的重大統計工作「勞動力調查」已包含有關焦慮和抑鬱的問題，更廣泛的快樂調查也早已存在，蓋洛普等機構蒐集世界各國生活滿意度的資料。人類發展指標從1990年以來每年作調查，反映健康、教育與所得等項目。（愛爾蘭在全球排名第五，顯示的確生活除了錢還有更重要的東西。）
多做一些沒有什麼壞處，政府參與的象徵意義顯然很重要。但這些政府想傳達什麼訊息？沙克吉如此熱衷的原因之一是，法國人沒把大部分時間花在工作上，因而降低了法國的GDP。法國在大多數別的指標應該會更好看。
這也沒什麼不對，但其中有一個困難：國家統計局希望避免「只專注於GDP」，但有哪個政府只專注在GDP？法國人不需要史提格里茲和沈恩告訴他們怎麼快活過日子。甚至盎格魯撒克遜國家操心失業問題也不下於GDP，而且有充足的理由。快樂研究證實，失業是特別悲慘的經驗，但早在快樂研究出現前，失業就是重要的政治議題。
不丹提供一個有用的教訓，告訴世人蒐集快樂資料和讓人民快樂是兩回事。不丹以其領先全球的「國民快樂毛額」（gross national happiness）而備受那些天真的快樂學究推崇。但根據人權觀察組織，不丹的少數族群尼泊爾人大部分被剝奪公民權，且多年來被脅迫驅離該國，這些人在尼泊爾難民營可能對快樂政策的發展有完全不同的看法。
我還不致於贊成已故1960年代香港財政司長郭伯偉（John Cowperthwaite）的作法，他拒絕蒐集經濟統計資料，唯恐倫敦當局插手香港的成功管理。但這其中有值得學習之處，國家統計局可以、且應該蒐集快樂資料，但別期待因此而感到幸福洋溢。
（作者Tim Harford是金融時報專欄）
【2010/11/22 經濟日報】
SOURCE
2010/11/22
香港‧打擊西方經濟‧基地：續寄郵包炸彈
* 國際
2010-11-21 18:00
（香港21日訊）監測組織表示，“基地”恐怖組織也門分支誓言，將繼續以類似上個月通過貨機寄出郵包炸彈的方式，攻擊西方國家，有如在“敵人身上割出數以千計傷口的策略，令對方流血致死”。
位於也門的阿拉伯半島“基地”組織分支（AQAP）表示，該組織將郵包炸彈置於飛往美國的貨機上，目的是為了造成巨大的經濟損失，而非大規模人員傷亡。
“基地”說，這兩個被安全官員在迪拜和英國截獲的包裹，是“術後出血”計劃的一部份，此襲擊計劃成本僅4千200美元（1萬3千122令吉）。
“基地”表示，造成大量人員傷亡如911中遭襲擊的紐約、華盛頓的攻擊事件，已不是該組織的主要襲擊手法。
奧巴馬安撫機場安檢民怨
另一方面，美國機場實施的新安檢措施爆民怨，美國總統奧巴馬上週六表示，理解人們的不滿，但專家認為這是遏止恐襲陰謀的唯一有效方式。
奧巴馬在葡萄牙首都里斯本表示，他明白人們對機場新安檢措施感到懊惱。他已經要求運輸安全局“不斷改善及衡量”，到底我們所做的，是否是確保美國人民安全的唯一方法。
但他說，繼去年聖誕的炸彈攻擊密謀後，運輸安全局人員可能也面對巨大壓力，以確保沒有人偷運爆炸物登機。
星洲日報／國際‧2010.11.21
SOURCE
2010-11-21 18:00
（香港21日訊）監測組織表示，“基地”恐怖組織也門分支誓言，將繼續以類似上個月通過貨機寄出郵包炸彈的方式，攻擊西方國家，有如在“敵人身上割出數以千計傷口的策略，令對方流血致死”。
位於也門的阿拉伯半島“基地”組織分支（AQAP）表示，該組織將郵包炸彈置於飛往美國的貨機上，目的是為了造成巨大的經濟損失，而非大規模人員傷亡。
“基地”說，這兩個被安全官員在迪拜和英國截獲的包裹，是“術後出血”計劃的一部份，此襲擊計劃成本僅4千200美元（1萬3千122令吉）。
“基地”表示，造成大量人員傷亡如911中遭襲擊的紐約、華盛頓的攻擊事件，已不是該組織的主要襲擊手法。
奧巴馬安撫機場安檢民怨
另一方面，美國機場實施的新安檢措施爆民怨，美國總統奧巴馬上週六表示，理解人們的不滿，但專家認為這是遏止恐襲陰謀的唯一有效方式。
奧巴馬在葡萄牙首都里斯本表示，他明白人們對機場新安檢措施感到懊惱。他已經要求運輸安全局“不斷改善及衡量”，到底我們所做的，是否是確保美國人民安全的唯一方法。
但他說，繼去年聖誕的炸彈攻擊密謀後，運輸安全局人員可能也面對巨大壓力，以確保沒有人偷運爆炸物登機。
星洲日報／國際‧2010.11.21
SOURCE
愛爾蘭將獲援助，激勵歐元！
USD/JPY
上週五日本財務大臣野田佳彥對經濟前景發出謹慎論調，認為經濟仍存在下行風險，另經濟財政大臣海江田萬裡表示當前日圓匯價依然較高，而且日本首相菅直人表示支持美元作為全球主要儲備貨幣的地位，但美國聯邦準備理事會(FED)主席貝南克為飽受抨擊的公債購買計劃辯護稱，疲弱的經濟成長、通貨膨脹率下滑及居高不下的失業率讓決策者相信，要繼續實現支撐美元匯價的強勁經濟基本面及支持全球經濟復甦，最佳途徑是採取促進經濟在物價穩定前提下恢復強勁增長的政策，貝南克表達其施行量化寬鬆貨幣政策的決心，支撐美元兌日圓徘徊於83.64高點。隨著中國公佈10月居民消費者物價指數(CPI)同比上漲4.4%，創二十五個月新高，國家信息中心更預計今年第四季CPI同比上漲3.8%，創年內季度新高，嚴峻的物價形勢迫使中國央行宣佈年內第五次上調存款準備金率0.5個百分點，本月第二次動用數量型工具對沖國內流動性，年末再加息的可能性升高，打擊風險資產，並拖累美元兌日圓下滑至83.15低點。預估今日美元兌日圓阻力於83.50-70，支撐於82.80-83.00。
EUR/USD
FED主席貝南克上週五為備受爭議的買債計劃高調辯護，顯示此計劃在執行中不會後退，使歐元獲得提振，另市場預計愛爾蘭將達成協議支持銀行業和削減赤字，而且德國10月生產者物價指數(PPI)較前月升0.4%優於預期，推動支撐歐元兌美元自1.3609低點上漲。國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)主席卡恩表示，歐洲存在嚴重的增長問題，且歐洲主權債務危機尚未結束，尤其部分歐洲南部國家生產率落後及缺乏競爭力，但愛爾蘭央行總裁霍諾漢表示將從歐洲夥伴國家及IMF取得數佰億歐元貸款，IMF將為支離破碎的銀行業提供備援資金，另歐盟執委會、歐洲央行及IMF與愛爾蘭就援助方案展開討論，緩和市場的擔憂，提振歐元兌美元反彈至1.3731。預估今日歐元兌美元支撐於1.3650-80，阻力於1.3800-30。
GBP/USD
英國較佳的零售銷售及工廠訂單數據支撐英鎊，另愛爾蘭問題將獲解決提升市場風險偏好，上週五推高英鎊兌美元至匯價至1.6094高點。英國央行副總裁表示英國通貨膨脹率將回到目標水準2%以下或更低，令市場對央行未來政策備受關注，而且中國調升銀行業存款準備率及IMF主席對歐洲國家謹慎的經濟成長預期，衝擊英鎊兌美元回吐至1.5938低點。預估今日英鎊兌美元支撐於1.5950-80，阻力於1.6080-1.6100。
SOURCE
上週五日本財務大臣野田佳彥對經濟前景發出謹慎論調，認為經濟仍存在下行風險，另經濟財政大臣海江田萬裡表示當前日圓匯價依然較高，而且日本首相菅直人表示支持美元作為全球主要儲備貨幣的地位，但美國聯邦準備理事會(FED)主席貝南克為飽受抨擊的公債購買計劃辯護稱，疲弱的經濟成長、通貨膨脹率下滑及居高不下的失業率讓決策者相信，要繼續實現支撐美元匯價的強勁經濟基本面及支持全球經濟復甦，最佳途徑是採取促進經濟在物價穩定前提下恢復強勁增長的政策，貝南克表達其施行量化寬鬆貨幣政策的決心，支撐美元兌日圓徘徊於83.64高點。隨著中國公佈10月居民消費者物價指數(CPI)同比上漲4.4%，創二十五個月新高，國家信息中心更預計今年第四季CPI同比上漲3.8%，創年內季度新高，嚴峻的物價形勢迫使中國央行宣佈年內第五次上調存款準備金率0.5個百分點，本月第二次動用數量型工具對沖國內流動性，年末再加息的可能性升高，打擊風險資產，並拖累美元兌日圓下滑至83.15低點。預估今日美元兌日圓阻力於83.50-70，支撐於82.80-83.00。
EUR/USD
FED主席貝南克上週五為備受爭議的買債計劃高調辯護，顯示此計劃在執行中不會後退，使歐元獲得提振，另市場預計愛爾蘭將達成協議支持銀行業和削減赤字，而且德國10月生產者物價指數(PPI)較前月升0.4%優於預期，推動支撐歐元兌美元自1.3609低點上漲。國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)主席卡恩表示，歐洲存在嚴重的增長問題，且歐洲主權債務危機尚未結束，尤其部分歐洲南部國家生產率落後及缺乏競爭力，但愛爾蘭央行總裁霍諾漢表示將從歐洲夥伴國家及IMF取得數佰億歐元貸款，IMF將為支離破碎的銀行業提供備援資金，另歐盟執委會、歐洲央行及IMF與愛爾蘭就援助方案展開討論，緩和市場的擔憂，提振歐元兌美元反彈至1.3731。預估今日歐元兌美元支撐於1.3650-80，阻力於1.3800-30。
GBP/USD
英國較佳的零售銷售及工廠訂單數據支撐英鎊，另愛爾蘭問題將獲解決提升市場風險偏好，上週五推高英鎊兌美元至匯價至1.6094高點。英國央行副總裁表示英國通貨膨脹率將回到目標水準2%以下或更低，令市場對央行未來政策備受關注，而且中國調升銀行業存款準備率及IMF主席對歐洲國家謹慎的經濟成長預期，衝擊英鎊兌美元回吐至1.5938低點。預估今日英鎊兌美元支撐於1.5950-80，阻力於1.6080-1.6100。
SOURCE
哈利波特：10年挣版稅9550萬
英國作家羅琳 (J.K. Rowling）的哈利波特，10年來在大陸拿了9550萬人民幣的版稅收入，超過任何一個中國本土暢銷書作家的版稅。
最近10年是中國經濟成長的黃金10年，而中國本土圖書單本的平均銷售量只有6000冊。
與此同時，來自西方各國的超級暢銷書，「卻一次又一次在中國掀起閱讀風暴，中國讀者口袋中的真金白銀，總是被外國作家輕而易舉地撈走。」羅琳的哈利波特系列叢書從2000年9月正式引進中國，10年間共引進了7部，每一部的平均銷售量都達到驚人的300萬冊。
「羅琳本人沒來過中國內地，卻不費吹灰之力賺走了中國人9550萬元！」另一方面，外國作家在大陸市場瘋狂撈錢之際，中國文學也在積極出擊海外市場，但遺憾的是，直到今天仍然沒有一部中國現代文學作品真正在海外大賣。
在中國作家方面，最會賺錢的是楊紅櫻的2500萬元版稅，其次是郭敬明的2300萬、鄭淵潔1900萬。台灣是李敖300萬元，龍應台260萬，星雲大師255萬。
SOURCE
最近10年是中國經濟成長的黃金10年，而中國本土圖書單本的平均銷售量只有6000冊。
與此同時，來自西方各國的超級暢銷書，「卻一次又一次在中國掀起閱讀風暴，中國讀者口袋中的真金白銀，總是被外國作家輕而易舉地撈走。」羅琳的哈利波特系列叢書從2000年9月正式引進中國，10年間共引進了7部，每一部的平均銷售量都達到驚人的300萬冊。
「羅琳本人沒來過中國內地，卻不費吹灰之力賺走了中國人9550萬元！」另一方面，外國作家在大陸市場瘋狂撈錢之際，中國文學也在積極出擊海外市場，但遺憾的是，直到今天仍然沒有一部中國現代文學作品真正在海外大賣。
在中國作家方面，最會賺錢的是楊紅櫻的2500萬元版稅，其次是郭敬明的2300萬、鄭淵潔1900萬。台灣是李敖300萬元，龍應台260萬，星雲大師255萬。
SOURCE
愛爾蘭證實將尋求紓困 G7視訊會議商討危機
愛爾蘭總理柯文(Brian Cowen)(左)與財政部長雷尼罕(Brian Lenihan)21日在記者會中宣布，歐洲聯盟已經同意金援愛爾蘭抒困。(afp)
時間：2010/11/22 05:12
撰稿‧編輯：吳寧康 新聞引據： 中央社
愛爾蘭總理柯文(Brian Cowen)(左)與財政部長雷尼罕(Brian Lenihan)21日在記者會中宣布，歐洲聯盟已經同意金援愛爾蘭抒困。(afp)
愛爾蘭財政部長雷尼罕(Brian Lenihan)21日終結了數週以來各界的揣測，表示愛爾蘭將尋求國際紓困。外交人士表示，七大工業國集團(G7)財長將舉行視訊會議，商討愛爾蘭的經濟危機。
雷尼罕告訴愛爾蘭公共廣播公司RTE，他將建議政府申請紓困，並展開正式協商。但他駁斥愛爾蘭應調升公司稅的說法，表示改變愛爾蘭公司稅並未列入協商方針內，這會抑制愛爾蘭經濟成長的能力。
雷尼罕表示，愛爾蘭打算申請的紓困額度將是「三位數」，粉碎了媒體21日報導的愛爾蘭需要高達1,200億歐元金援的說法。
國際貨幣基金(IMF)和歐盟執行委員會官員，自18日起一直在研擬金援方案，以協助愛爾蘭挽救債台高築的國內銀行。而G7財長21日也將舉行視訊會議，商討愛爾蘭的經濟危機。
G7包括美國、日本、加拿大、法國、德國、義大利和英國。英國早已對愛爾蘭提供直接的雙邊援助。
SOURCE
Still choppy
The inflation overshoot
Still choppy
The economic conditions are not ideal to launch a British version of QE2
Nov 18th 2010
This week’s letter from Mr King was the fourth he has had to write this year as inflation has persistently strayed more than a percentage point above the 2% target. It was prompted by official figures showing that consumer prices rose by a higher-than-expected 3.2% in the year to October (see chart), up from 3.1% in September. Indeed, in nine letters since April 2007, Mr King has been obliged to explain why inflation has been above 3%.
That inflation has remained stubbornly high in the wake of the most severe recession since the second world war is odd. In this respect, Britain is unusual among advanced economies, as other figures also published this week highlighted. Inflation in the euro area in the year to October ran at 1.9%; in America it was 1.2%.
The main reason why Britain has been the exception is the steep fall in the pound, whose trade-weighted value slumped by some 25% between mid-2007 and early 2009. Even though the effects on inflation through higher import prices should be waning now, there have been other adverse temporary influences, such as past rises in oil prices and the return of the main rate of VAT, a consumption tax, to 17.5% at the start of 2010, after 13 months in which it was set at 15% as part of the previous government’s fiscal stimulus.
The difficulty for the bank’s monetary-policy committee (MPC) is that there will be yet more temporary factors pushing inflation up over the next year. In January VAT will rise again, to 20%, an increase that is expected to be passed through in full to prices, whereas only half of its preceding fall and rise are reckoned to have been passed on. Moreover, world food prices have been climbing steeply.
In January Mr King said that “in both of the past two years inflation picked up as a result of temporary price-level factors and then fell back, as the MPC had predicted.” But the bank’s own central forecast, published on November 10th, shows that inflation will reach 3.6% in the first quarter of next year and will not fall below 3% until early 2012. Just what “temporary” means in the bank’s lexicon is unclear.
The risk in this, as the governor acknowledged in his latest letter to Mr Osborne, is that people start to expect higher inflation. The bank argues that expectations remain consistent with hitting the inflation target in the medium term. However, two out of three household surveys show that expectations of inflation one year ahead have been moving up.
The big picture, as Mr King sees it, is that the slack in the economy following the steep recession will eventually pull down inflation. This remains plausible. Average earnings are growing at only 2% according to official figures out this week; the unemployment rate is a still-high 7.7%. But financial crises tend to inflict a lot of damage on capacity. That could mean that the margin of spare resources is not that large, which would chime with surveys of businesses.
Mr King is still being given the benefit of the doubt, but he must be chary of his stock of credibility. The inflation overshoots make it more difficult for the bank to follow the United States, where the Federal Reserve has launched another bout of quantitative easing nicknamed QE2. That lifeboat won’t be launched in Britain in the near future, unless there is very clear evidence that the recovery is foundering.
Britain
Gang that can't shoot straight
European leaders are blamed for exacerbating the euro crisis, but for the wrong reasons
Nov 18th 2010
IN MAY, when they rescued Greece from the bond markets at the 11th hour, the members of the euro zone vowed never to get into such a mess again. To keep the speculators at bay, they armed themselves with the biggest gun they could muster: a trillion-dollar loan fund. Many hoped the weapon would prove such a deterrent that, like the “bazooka” of Hank Paulson, America’s treasury secretary under George Bush, it would never have to be used. Yet, just as with Mr Paulson’s guarantee, the euro zone’s weapon barely deterred the barbarians.
Now Ireland is under assault and the euro zone has loaded the first bullet into the chamber. On November 16th euro-zone finance ministers said there would be a “short and focused consultation”, involving the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF, to assess the best way of helping Ireland to salvage its collapsed banks (see article). There has been a curious role reversal between the Greek crisis in May and the Irish one now. In the spring everything was made worse by the hesitation of the main donor, Germany, over helping spendthrift Greeks. This time it is the would-be recipient, Ireland, that is prevaricating dangerously. Yet, like it or not, the rescue party is being saddled up. Will it succeed?
It would certainly help if the riders showed better order and learnt to shoot straight. The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, is at the forefront, but she is also the subject of much mutinous talk since leading her colleagues into the badlands at last month’s EU summit. She persuaded them to reopen last year’s Lisbon treaty to create a bail-out system that would allow the restructuring of a country’s debts. No longer, she declared, would good European taxpayers have to bear the risk of protecting their financial system alone; she would exact a price from speculators too. Jean-Claude Trichet, the ECB president, warned the leaders that they risked stirring up restive markets, but was ignored.
Within days, the euro countries cantered into a new ambush. Yields on the bonds of weak countries broke new euro-zone records. A fortnight later, at the Seoul G20 summit, Mrs Merkel was still in combative mood. “Let me put it simply: in this regard there may be a contradiction between the interests of the financial world and the interests of the political world.” But a day later the EU sent out a peace party. The finance ministers of the five biggest countries explained that they had been misunderstood. The debts of euro-zone members were protected by their bail-out fund until 2013; any notion of imposing “haircuts” on bondholders would apply only to new debt issued thereafter.
For economists such as Jean Pisani-Ferry, director of Bruegel, a think-tank in Brussels, Mrs Merkel’s action was a good idea that went wrong. Investors should indeed bear some of the pain, but she would have done better to venture into this territory next year, once markets had calmed down, and with a proper map. Brian Cowen, Ireland’s prime minister, grumbled about the turmoil being an “unforeseen consequence” of the German move. His Greek colleague, George Papandreou, was less charitable. Germany, he said, risked creating “a self-fulfilling prophecy”. It was placing greater burdens on countries already in trouble. “This could break backs. This could force economies towards bankruptcy.” Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister, made clear he thought the Greeks were being ungrateful for the help they received earlier this year.
Other politicians have exacerbated matters, too. Portuguese ministers spoke openly about needing a rescue or even having to leave the euro. Hours before the finance ministers’ meeting, Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council, carelessly talked of Europe being “in a survival crisis”. It was left to Olli Rehn, the laconic Finnish economic commissioner, to call for “cool heads”. Plainly, the rescue of Ireland is not made any easier by all the political bickering. But in a union of 27 countries, decisions inevitably take longer and messages get more confused than markets would like. European politicians who delayed the Greek rescue and now seem to be making a dog’s dinner of the Irish one deserve blame for responding slowly and fitfully to the signals from financial markets—a charge that has much resonance when it comes to the Germans. Yet it would be wrongheaded to leap from this to blaming Germany for the euro’s crisis.
It was the Greeks, not the Germans, who lied about their deficit numbers (this week, the true Greek deficit for 2009 was pushed up again by the European statisticians, to 15.4% of GDP). It was Dublin (and Madrid), not Berlin, that presided cheerfully over a hugely inflated house-price bubble. It was Irish politicians, not German ones, who happily took plenty of campaign-finance contributions from their property-developer chums. Mrs Merkel has much to answer for when it comes to running a large current-account surplus and imparting a deflationary bias to the euro zone. But she is not to blame for the feckless failure of weaker euro-zone countries to push through reforms that might have made up for their loss of competitiveness.
The benefit of self-harm
If there is any silver lining at all to emerge from the turmoil of recent weeks, it is that the value of the euro has fallen, or at least that it has stopped rising. A euro crisis is certainly an expensive way to achieve this goal, but at least exporters will be grateful. According to the latest figures, the euro zone as a whole posted a larger-than-expected trade surplus in September. Many feared that the euro might get caught in the crossfire of the currency war between America and China. They were wrong. Ranged against the shotgun of America’s quantitative easing, and the shield of China’s capital controls, Europe does at least have leaders who are well drilled in shooting themselves in the foot.
Europe
Old wine in new bottles
Nicolas Sarkozy’s much-touted reshuffle proves to be a small one that keeps the prime minister in place
Nov 18th 2010 | PARIS
If Mr Sarkozy was seeking to rebrand his government, he missed the mark. The reappointment of Mr Fillon, who is now expected to stay until the 2012 presidential election, is an almost unprecedented individual triumph. Under the Fifth Republic, French prime ministers have been treated as dispensable, to be sacked whenever things go badly. Just weeks ago, Mr Sarkozy argued in private that his old team was worn out and needed renewing. Mr Fillon, according to a friend, had even rented a new apartment in Paris. But Mr Sarkozy’s mistake was not to have a credible alternative. Given the prime minister’s greater popularity among voters and deputies, Mr Sarkozy risked trouble from having him outside the tent. By dithering, he has emerged weaker and Mr Fillon stronger.
Much of the rest of the new team is anything but. Out has gone the big-tent approach that embraced the left as well as the centre and lent Mr Sarkozy’s first government its originality. All but one of the six figures from the left have disappeared, including Bernard Kouchner, who was sacked as foreign minister. Out too went leading centrists, including Jean-Louis Borloo, the environment minister, and several liberals. Denied the prime minister’s job that he thought was within his grasp, Mr Borloo declined a lesser post and walked off in a huff.
The new government draws heavily on the old guard from the Gaullist RPR party founded by Jacques Chirac, which Mr Sarkozy broadened to the centre under the UMP umbrella for the 2007 presidential election. With the return of Alain Juppé, Mr Chirac’s prime minister in the mid-1990s, who takes over at defence, and the transfer of Michèle Alliot-Marie from justice to the foreign ministry, the new government has a chiraquien feel. François Baroin, another Chirac protégé, keeps his job as budget minister. Indeed, for a president who promised a rupture with the Chirac era, his new team would not look out of place under the old Gaullist. French satirists had a field day, as did the opposition. “So much fuss for so little!”, mocked Martine Aubry, the Socialist leader.
Mr Sarkozy, who appeared live on prime-time television this week, seems to want to accomplish three things with his narrower Gaullist line-up. One is to create a more cohesive team. Although the broad-based approach was arresting, it was blamed for confusing supporters on the right, as well as for personality clashes. One by one, left-wingers such as Jean-Pierre Jouyet, a former Europe minister, have quit. Most of the ethnic-minority faces have been dumped. Rachida Dati went last year; Rama Yade and Fadela Amara this time. Eric Woerth, a minister caught up in a party-financing judicial investigation linked to Liliane Bettencourt, the billionaire heiress to the L’Oréal cosmetics empire, has been fired. By tightening the team around his base, Mr Sarkozy may hope to thwart damaging scandals and rows and present a more unified front.
The second aim, which remains to be tested, is to return to a more traditional form of governing. Mr Sarkozy conceded that there should be a more balanced division of labour with his prime minister. His advisers are to appear less in public, leaving ministers to get on with their jobs. The president himself, studiously calm during his TV appearance, intends to stand back a bit. Jetting about during France’s presidency of the G20 will occupy a big chunk of his time. Laurent Joffrin, editor of Libération, a left-wing newspaper, called this a shift from baroque to classical: “sarkozysme without the excess”.
Third, and despite the chiraquien flavour of the new government, Mr Sarkozy wants to pursue structural reforms. Until recently, he was himself arguing for a pause. This week, by contrast, he said he wanted “to make all five years effective for France”. He announced a rethink of the tax system by next summer, based partly on Germany’s fiscal structure, and a new form of social security to finance care of the elderly. The idea is to make both budget-neutral. Mr Fillon is a good choice to make sure of this. He was a lone voice in 2007 when he declared that “France is bankrupt”. This week, he said that his “absolute priority” was still to trim the deficit.
Although the reappointment of Mr Fillon is popular, in the short run the reshuffle is unlikely to lift Mr Sarkozy’s approval ratings from their record lows. Voters do not seem to give him much credit for holding out through weeks of strikes and protests to lift the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62, although that may change in time. Some deputies still wonder, privately, if he is the best man to lead the French right into the 2012 election. One poll last week suggested that, in a presidential run-off, Mr Sarkozy would be beaten, albeit narrowly, by Ms Aubry—but that, if she faced Mr Fillon instead, he would be victorious.
Europe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
