There is some similarity with what the G20 has been aiming at with its “Framework for growth”, a process through which countries identify shared objectives, the policies needed to reach them, and the progress toward them … although we can obviously be more ambitious for the euro area. •  In a decision phase, the euro area Finance Minister would propose a strategy, consisting of the collective objective and – as far as necessary – its country specific translations in terms of reforms and policy stance. This proposal would be subject to formal opinions from the Fiscal and Competitiveness Councils. It would then have to be adopted at simple majority by the Eurogroup, and further to be endorsed by the European Parliament. In case of a stalemate, it would be for Heads of States and Governments – the European Council in a euro format – to adopt the collective strategy, on the basis of an adapted proposal by the EA Finance Minister. We should of course bear in mind the rationale for subsidiarity. Euro area outcomes will remain dependent on national policies. Many areas of policy-making and all implementation will remain decentralised. Yet full coordination will require that economic policy stance and spillovers be collectively agreed upon, and that Member states work consistently to achieve the common objectives. 6  BIS central bankers’ speeches  B. Which tasks for a euro area Finance Minister? First, the Minister would be in charge of preparing the euro area-wide collective strategy to fulfill the mandate I already described.
François Villeroy de Galhau: Europe at a crossroads – how to achieve efficient economic governance in the euro area? Speech by Mr François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Bank of France, recorded for the event at Bruegel, Brussels, 22 March 2016. *  *  *  Summary There is a growing perception of the need to rethink the economic governance of the euro area. Compelling ideas have been put forward to that effect; yet their implementation is tricky, especially in the present climate of Euroscepticism. Shifting from ideas to action has become urgent if monetary policy is not to remain the only game in town. Clearly, the single monetary policy cannot be a substitute for the coordination of national economic policies or the lack of reforms. To be sure, the debate over EMU reform is politically loaded; but for euro area citizens the poor coordination of national policies involves a high cost in terms of growth, of several points of GDP. The economic case therefore needs to be made: this discussion is not about “more Brussels”, it is about more growth and jobs in Europe. In addition, it is not a choice between domestic reforms or European coordination; we need both. Between complete integration – of the monetary-policy type – and monitored national policies, as currently conducted, the missing link is “full coordination” of fiscal and structural policies. This is clearly shown in a matrix crossing these three degrees of integration and the four policy dimensions (monetary, financial, fiscal and structural).