The Work of the Werner Committee
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The work of the Werner Committee Source: DANESCU, Elena Rodica. ‘The work of the Werner Committee’, in A rereading of the Werner Report of 8 October 1970 in the light of the Pierre Werner family archives. Sanem: CVCE, 2012. Available at: www.cvce.eu. Copyright: (c) CVCE.EU by UNI.LU All rights of reproduction, of public communication, of adaptation, of distribution or of dissemination via Internet, internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries. Consult the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this site. URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/the_work_of_the_werner_committee-en-8a277bdc- f203-4134-9383-a890a5c8de66.html Last updated: 07/07/2016 1/24 The work of the Werner Committee 1 Whatever the case may be, Pierre Werner’s appointment as chairman was ratified by the Council on 6 March, and in that capacity he convened a preliminary meeting of the committee of experts in Luxembourg on 11 March 1970. Of the fourteen official meetings of the Werner Group, nine were held in Luxembourg (consolidating its reputation as a permanent capital of the Communities 2), three in Brussels, 3 one in Paris, one in Rome 4 and one in Copenhagen, on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the IMF and the World Bank. Preliminary meeting (Luxembourg, 11 March 1970) The main purpose of the preliminary meeting of the Werner Committee was to approve the working method to be adopted and to set the deadline for reaching its conclusions. It was established that the group would have a quorum for discussion if at least five of the seven members (the group’s secretary did not have voting rights) were present and that decisions would be taken by simple majority. ‘The group will do its best to present unanimous conclusions, but any member may ask for a minority opinion to be put forward.’ If required, experts could be called in to elucidate specific points. Each member of the committee could appoint an assistant of his choice, and secretarial services for the group were provided by the secretariat of the Monetary Committee. The group’s discussions were considered to be confidential and would only be minuted briefly. The group decided to meet ‘at intervals such as to allow for a preliminary report to be delivered to the Council by the end of May and for its discussions to be concluded, if possible, by the end of July.’ At the first meeting, Mr Werner in the chair gave his colleagues a preliminary comparative overview of the discussions on monetary integration and the proposals put forward at the beginning of the year by the Belgian Government (the Snoy Plan), the German Government (the Schiller Plan), the Luxembourg Government (the first Werner Plan, also known as the five-point Luxembourg Plan) and the Commission (the second Barre Plan). 5 He set out what he felt should be the priority focus for their work, namely putting forward practical ideas and methods for achieving the short-, medium- and long-term objectives. He emphasised the need to take all avenues and experiences that might prove useful at the various stages into account, even if their usefulness was not apparent at the outset. He also called on his colleagues to draw up notes describing the measures they planned to take to achieve the final objective and to put them forward for discussion. 6 He also presented the preliminary documentation that the Commission had supplied to the committee. 7 Note that, to underpin the reflection and documentation of its representative on the Werner Committee, the Commission set up an inter-directorate working party on economic and monetary union 8 (based around DGII), which included the directors and secretary of the Monetary Committee. For reasons of efficacy, the private office of Commission Vice-President Raymond Barre was also involved in this working party and offered its support to the committee of experts, among other things for logistical and financial questions and matters of protocol. 9 The preliminary documentation mentioned above consisted of political and scientific papers, explanatory presentations about economic union and currency, ‘stage-by-stage’ plans which already existed and accounts of similar experiments in that area, articles and press releases. As the work 2/24 went ahead, further material was added, to elucidate points of interest which came up in the course of discussion. Two major issues command attention in the documentation: the accession of the United Kingdom to the Communities and the establishment of a European Reserve Fund. On this latter point, the two main papers were drafted by Robert Triffin, including one which arose out of discussions in the Monnet Committee. 10 Through the whole period of the committee’s work, Pierre Werner and Robert Triffin, who knew each other and were working together long before 1970, 11 kept in close touch by way of dialogue and joint action, particularly thanks to the good offices of Jean Monnet. 12 First meeting (Luxembourg, 20 March 1970) The chairman convened the inaugural meeting of the Werner Group on 20 March 1970 in Luxembourg City. By way of preparation for this meeting, Raymond Barre, Vice-President of the Commission with responsibility for economic and monetary affairs, notified his colleagues ‘that it is likely that over the next few months and at least until the end of July, the ad hoc group will be meeting at least three times a month’, and requested that any governmental experts called in to assist the group should be treated in the same manner as the members of the group ‘in view of the very high level of those involved and the nature of the matters with which the group is dealing’. 13 The comparative overview, the target dates and the content of the various stages as set out in these notes, and the fact that they came first (dating from the preliminary meeting of the Werner Group on 6 March 1970), suggest to us that they were the inspiration behind the Commission’s paper (dated 18 March 1970), in which the comparative analysis adopts the same layout. At the inaugural meeting, the members of the group introduced their deputies, whom they had each chosen and who took part in the work. They were Johnny Schmitz (from Luxembourg, assistant to Mr Werner, the chairman), Jacques Mertens de Wilmars (from Belgium, assistant to Baron Ansiaux, Chairman of the Committee of Governors of the Central Banks), Anthony Looijen (from the Netherlands, assistant to Gerard Brouwers, Chairman of the Conjunctural Policy Committee), Jean-Michel Bloch-Lainé (from France, assistant to Bernard Clappier, Chairman of the Monetary Committee), Hans Tietmeyer (from Germany, assistant to Johann Baptist Schöllhorn, Chairman of the Medium-Term Economic Policy Committee), Simone Palumbo (from Italy, assistant to Gaetano Stammati, Chairman of the Budgetary Policy Committee) and Jean-Claude Morel (assistant to Ugo Mosca, Director-General for Economic and Financial Affairs at the EEC). At the first meeting, there was a first exchange of views on the main problems associated with setting up a plan by stages. Mr Werner, in the chair, made a detailed presentation and comparison of the various plans, measures and proposals for bringing about economic and monetary union (‘where there is a variety of monetary plans, there has to be a synthesis’), 14 laid down the priority areas for reflection (the final objective and the creation of the institutional structure), and set out the main target dates for the group’s work, including the final result, which, in the form of a report to the Council, was to be achieved by the end of July at the latest. The description of the starting point did not raise any major debates. ‘[…] We weren’t starting from a blank canvas. Economic integration was already under way. […] The liberalisations that had already taken place were resulting in a degree of interdependence such that national imbalances were having an impact on the economic situations of the other partners. The final objective was economic and monetary union, in other words an area in which goods and services, people and capital could circulate freely and without distortion of competition. A union of this sort would involve the full and irreversible convertibility of national currencies and the elimination of 3/24 exchange rate fluctuations.’ 15 Although the main objective was clear and all parties were in agreement on this, determining its exact details gave rise to bitter clashes between the ‘economists’ and the ‘monetarists’: 16 ‘from the outset, the German representative J. B. Schöllhorn, Chairman of the Medium-Term Economic Policy Committee, assisted by H. Tietmeyer, supported the position of the German Minister for Economic Affairs, Schiller, that prior convergence of economic policies was imperative. The Chairman of the Committee of Governors of the Central Banks, Baron Ansiaux (from the National Bank of Belgium), advocated the monetarist stance with a fervour that surprised me at the time. B. Clappier, Chairman of the Monetary Committee, assisted by J. M. Bloch-Lainé, supported Ansiaux’s position, as did G. Stammati, Chairman of the Budgetary Policy Committee. Brouwers, Chairman of the Conjunctural Policy Committee, was closer to Schöllhorn.’ 17 The discussions in the group bring out the fundamental thinking of its members as regards the objective to be attained, the means of getting there and the recommended timetable. Priority issues were the pooling of the Six’s reserves and the establishment of a Community central bank. Mr Werner’s promptings at the preliminary meeting therefore took the form of a decision. The Commission representative was given responsibility for drawing up a note ‘describing the final stage of the process of economic and monetary integration, with a reference to the part to be played, at that stage, by common reserves and, possibly, a Community central bank.’ 18 The other members, ‘each according to the area for which he is responsible in his capacity as chairman of one of the EEC Committees’, were to draft a note describing the steps each planned to take to achieve the final objective.