That the affable former agriculture and foreign minister has become the bogeyman of the Square Mile is thanks largely to the gloating of Nicolas Sarkozy. The French president claimed the appointment of Mr Barnier - who is supposed to act independently of national interests - amounted to a "triumph" of French ideas over Anglo-Saxon capitalism. The British were "big losers" in the battle for top Brussels' jobs, Mr Sarkozy added, making clear that he had installed his man. His comments triggered a furious backlash from Westminster and the City, where Mr Barnier's nomination to a job in which he will set the agenda for regulation was seen as a French-inspired plot to do down London as a financial centre....A staunch Gaullist, Mr Barnier shares the general's mistrust of financial capitalism and free markets. As agriculture minister, he zealously defended the European Union's common agricultural policy. He has adopted Mr Sarkozy's refrain of a "capitalism for entrepreneurs rather than a capitalism for speculators" but, like the president, has given little indication of what that means in practice. When proposing fresh EU financial regulation, Mr Barnier said he would stick to the "roadmap" of recommendations made by the Group of 20 leading economies, suggesting he did not wish to see Europe act unilaterally.
His comments triggered a furious backlash from Westminster and the City, where Mr Barnier's nomination to a job in which he will set the agenda for regulation was seen as a French-inspired plot to do down London as a financial centre....A staunch Gaullist, Mr Barnier shares the general's mistrust of financial capitalism and free markets. As agriculture minister, he zealously defended the European Union's common agricultural policy.
He has adopted Mr Sarkozy's refrain of a "capitalism for entrepreneurs rather than a capitalism for speculators" but, like the president, has given little indication of what that means in practice. When proposing fresh EU financial regulation, Mr Barnier said he would stick to the "roadmap" of recommendations made by the Group of 20 leading economies, suggesting he did not wish to see Europe act unilaterally.
... but, like the president, has given little indication of what that means in practice.
So far Sarkozy has given the French banks, starting with BNP-Paribas, everything they demanded needed, without constraining conditions like an equity swap. At the same time French companies are being strangled by lack of liquidities that are being hoarded by the banks. And did we mention banks started again to award large bonuses?
This looks like a choreographed show where the French side predictably rail against "speculation" and the British side against excessive regulation and threat to the British "financial industry".
Will anything change in practice? Caveat emptor.
Also note that Sarko has already managed to sabotage his protégé's debut, by running his big mouth -- typical. Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
"I considered him to be a lightweight among lightweights," says one former Commission colleague. "It was impossible to talk to him about his portfolio in an objective and business-like manner. He was too dimwitted to follow your arguments." (...) "I don't think he has the political stature or intellectual clout either to get his head entirely round the brief or to see off Paris," says a former Commission colleague. "If an issue concerning a French company came up at the Commission, he'd automatically be batting for l'Héxagone."
(...)
"I don't think he has the political stature or intellectual clout either to get his head entirely round the brief or to see off Paris," says a former Commission colleague. "If an issue concerning a French company came up at the Commission, he'd automatically be batting for l'Héxagone."
Why do I get the feeling that this is Mandelson speaking in both cases? In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
