Is the European Central Bank responsible for the crisis in Europe ?
It generated a nominal GDP of 17.6 trillion US dollars, representing approx. 20percent of the global GDP when measured in terms of purchasing power parity.
(http://en.wikipedia.org...). However, many of the member countries face the worst recession since the end of World War Second. The basic idea of EU which aims at integration and cooperation economically and politically among member states is being deteriorated these days.
I believe the main cause of the predicament comes from the existence of the European Central Bank (ECB).
In this debate Round 1 is acceptance. Round 2 is main arguments. Round 3 is rebuttal and conclusion.
I hope someone intertested in this topic accept the debate and discuss.
I accept. Due to the debate basically necessitating a counterplan, I am going to suggest that the cause of the EU reaching recession was a combination of American loaning systems (and their duplication around the developed world) and european nations improper abidence to regulation. I also wish to define the ECB as that which administers and advises the monetary policies of the 17 countries which accept it as an authority. For reference, the EFSF has no place in this debate due to it being timed at 2010, and thus too late to be a cause, and it's attempts to solve the problem are irrelevant unless they began in 2007.
Further, the crisis in Europe is defined as the credit crunch in 2007.
Finally, I repeat the commonly accepted rules of no plagiarism from another source without citation.
According to the news report, eurozone countries face unemployment rate at record high 11percent.(http://money.cnn.com...) ``The 17-nation eurozone`s unemployment rate reached the highest level since the creation of the common currency 13 years ago, climbing to 11percent in Epril as employers slashed 110,000jobs.``
(http://money.cnn.com...) As the same report points out, the employers are blamed for the recent economic and social crisis in Europe because they introduce the business strategy to reduce the number of their employees to survive in fierce global competition.
However, in my opinion the main cause comes from the existence of European Central Bank(ECB). I define the basic tasks and roles of the Bank. The first is that ``the primary objectives of the ECB is to maintain price stability within the Eurozone, which is the same as keeping inflation. The Governing Council defined price stability as inflation of around 2percent.``(http://en.wikipedia.org...) Second is that ECB requires member countries to keep the deficit of the central government at target level. For example, ``For their mutual assurance and stability of the currency, members of the eurozone have to respect the Stability and Growth Pact , which sets agreed limits on deficits and national debt, with associated sanctions for deviation. The Pact originally set a limit of 3 percent of GDP for the yearly deficit of all eurozone member states, with fines for any state which exceeded this amount.``(http://en. wikipedia.org)
The important thing is that the monetary and financial policy of all eorozone countries are influenced, controlled and managed by the ECB. Therefore, it is not too much to say that each country is robbed of their sovereignty.
And governments can not introduce the economic policy to stimulate their domestic demand and to promote export.
I believe the only solution to the balance-of-payment deficit is to devalue the euro against Japanese yen and U.S.dollar.
This contributes to improving competitiveness in Greece because ``Greece`s export items consist of refined petroleum products, some chemicals, shipping and tourism.``(Devalue the euro to help Europe, by Dipak Basu, The Japan Times,
From above mentioned arguments I believe ECB is responsible for the ECB.
Due to the fact I have no motivation for this today (I had loads of motivation yesterday, why didn't I just write it then?), I'm going to follow common debate style and just pose my own argument of what should be for blame.
The European crisis started in 2007, and was an incredibly massive impact on the Eurozone. However, what was the origin of all things? Well, for that we need to go back to the ECB, and the fiscal policies all the Eurozone countries agreed on. Germany, France, Spain, Italy and others all agreed to rules which stated that they shall, among other things, limit structural borrowing to 0.5%, and general borrowing to 3%. 
The ECB put in these restrictions. The countries all agreed to them. Thus, they thought they were all thought of as doable. Most commentators also agreed. This was called the Stability and Growth Pact.
The Stability and growth pact
The Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) is a rule-based framework for the coordination of national fiscal policies in the economic and monetary union (EMU). It was established to safeguard sound public finances, an important requirement for EMU to function properly. The Pact consists of a preventive and a dissuasive arm.
Under the provisions of the preventive arm, Member States must submit annual stability or convergence programmes, showing how they intend to achieve or safeguard sound fiscal positions in the medium term taking into account the impending budgetary impact of population aging. The Commission assesses these programmes and the Council gives its Opinion on them. The preventive arm includes two policy instruments.
The actual problem
1. Rebuttal : You point out that the European Commision and the governments of member countries are at fault not the ECB(European Central Bank). However, I understand that ECB has something to do with the EC. The head of both
organizations have held meetings at regular intervals to discuss fiscal and monetary problems of member countries.
The reason is that European Union is governed by seven institutions and the ECB is one of them.
Therefore, I believe the ECB is partly responsible for the crisis in Europe.
2. Conclusion: In relation to the ECB, we must discuss the role of ERM(Exchange Rate Mechanism).
It is closely linked to the policy adopted by the ECB. The ajustment mechanism of ERM has a similarity to the gold standard. Its main objective is to reduce exchange rate variability and to achieve monetary stability in Europe.
The important thing is that the central bank must controll and keep the exchange rate according to the volume of the foreign exchange reserves and the growth of the financial resources of the national government.
For example, Greece and Spain have been urged to appreciate the foreign exchange rate for coping with the huge deficit of their governments. Therefore, this situation caused poor export activity and the increase of the unemployment rate. This cases show that the sovereignty of both governments is robbed of by the ECB.
In concluding my arguments, I want to say that Spain has been too dependent on the ECB. The central bank has been less active in supervising private banks. This contributed to triggering bad loans among them for people who are interested in buying their homes. For example, ``the debt of the Spanish banking system totals 305percent of GDP, or about 3.3trillion euro.``(An EU `banking union` will make things worse, by Hans- Werner Sinn, The Japan Times, June 16,2012). We must admit that the ECB is responsible for the serious problems facing Europe.
I thank Con for good debate.
I'll post rebuttals, then my concluding argument
ECB and EC contact
The two have very few meetings in reality. The ECB and EC have only officially met (though members from both unofficially meet up to around a half dozen times in the last decade) once. Like all other committees and comissions and groups in the EU, they can meet with any other group but do so very rarely, as of the size of the EU, the decentralised committees, and the nature of the two distinct roles: one being primarily advisory roles to the European Parliament and other committees, whilst the other (the ECB) lends out the money to countries. They meet, but not as much as my opponent suggests. However, it should be noted in an aside that since 2008, the roles of the two have changed and they are in a lot more regular meets, but as this is after the recession's cause, this is an irrelevancy.
Firstly, this is a new argument, and thus it is poor conduct: as an older member of the debating community, I hope my opponent realises this. I shall refer to my opponent's example, though, and form a turn from it.
Greece, Spain, and the EC(B)
If we assume that the ECB and EC meet regularly and thus Greece's mistakes can strenuously be linked to the ECB, we have to realise something. Greece broke 3 of the 9 rules set up by the EC(B), and lied repeatedly about its stats. By comparison, Spain, as "top of the class", broke no rules. Thus, Greece's loan comes with grave stipulations. Now, why did Spain want a loan? The thing is, the banks aren't that bad. Yes, the 305% GDP debt of Spanish banks sound bad, but compare that to Britain: We have over 1000% GDP debt in the banks and US is at 400% at last check. This 305% isn't surprising, nor large, nor dangerous. Germany is similar: there is no major threat here. Nor is it a massive problem. Nor is this a cause by any stretch: 4 years into the crisis is not a cause of the crisis.
The problem is on the EU countries, as I showed in Round 2, coupled partially by the EC. I have shown how the ECB deals with other issues, and the issues it deals with does not have that large an impact. Thank you for reading.
1 - http://www.ecb.int...;
2 - http://www.bbc.co.uk...;
3 - http://articles.businessinsider.com...;
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|