The United Kingdom and European Monetary Policy 1976–2007: Exchange Rate Mechanism and Economic and Monetary Union

Author(s):  
Birgit Bujard
2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Aspinwall

This article examines British preferences on European monetary integration. It challenges dominant theories of preference formation, suggesting an alternative explanation focusing on governmental majority. Empirical evidence is presented on both UK economic behaviour and the views of domestic economic interests, as well as government majority. The article also analyses first and second-hand accounts of the main players involved in three cases: the decision not to join the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1979, the decision to join the ERM in 1990, and the decision to opt out of stage 3 of Economic and Monetary Union.


Author(s):  
Ulla Neergaard

From the very beginning, an essential cornerstone of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) has been the European Exchange Rate Mechanism II (ERM II). It has been in force since 1 January 1999, ie from the initiation of the third phase of the EMU. Its overall purpose is to link currencies of Member States outside the euro area to the euro. Its importance lies in the fact that aspiring Member States must first join the mechanism for at least two years before being admitted as members of the euro area, as ERM II ‘membership’ is one of the four convergence criteria, which are required to be fulfilled for a Member State’s eventual adoption of the euro.


2020 ◽  
pp. 171-200
Author(s):  
Stephen Wall

Thatcher got less money back from her EEC partners than she had argued for but secured a lasting deal to replace endless yearly battles for refunds. Arguments over reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) continued. Thatcher championed economic liberalization in Europe, but was opposed to the Treaty changes needed to bring it about. She compromised and got most of what she wanted, at the price of accepting that economic and monetary union (a single currency) would be pursued. Her attempt at a closer relationship with Kohl and Mitterrand was rebuffed. The Bruges speech created shockwaves around Europe. Thatcher and Howe (Foreign Secretary until 1989) were at odds over Europe. He helped force her to agree to join the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). Her stridency provoked his resignation from government and her downfall. Her policies and legacy tend to be caricatured.


1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57
Author(s):  
Christa Randzio-Plath

Economic and Monetary Union has been created to complete the single market, to provide optimal macro-economic conditions for employment-enhancing growth and to promote further political integration in the European Union. Unfortunately in the discussion about monetary union the reasons why Europe needs EMU have been almost forgotten. As the future European Central Bank will be solely responsible for European monetary policy and thus be influencing strongly the overall macro-economic framework in Europe, the question of democratic accountability of monetary authorities needs to be debated. EMU is Europe's answer to the challenges of the 21 st century.


1990 ◽  
Vol 133 ◽  
pp. 7-23

We start our forecast this time with an exchange rate 9½ per cent higher in the third quarter of this year than we anticipated in May. The main reason for the appreciation of sterling was probably a reassessment by the market of the likely course of UK monetary policy over the next year or two. The likelihood of an early and significant fall in interest rates has receded, as forecasts of the underlying rate of inflation have been revised up. At the same time the commitment to join the exchange-rate mechanism has become firmer, and the Chancellor has been interpreted as wishing to ‘talk the rate up’.


1996 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne Sandholtz

A yearlong nightmare for the European Monetary System (EMS) began in September 1992. Amid name–calling, finger–pointing, and hand–wringing, the British pound and the Italian lira dropped out of the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). In succeeding months, virtually every other ERM currency came under attack.1 Three of them—the Spanish peseta, the Portuguese escudo, and the Irish punt—devalued within the system. Three others—the French franc, the Belgian franc, and the Danish krone—avoided devaluation, but only at the price of recurrent and costly rounds of intervention by multiple central banks. Finally, in August 1993, the defenders of the parities surrendered. The twelve EMS countries agreed to expand the fluctuation margins from 2.25 per cent on either side of parity (6 per cent for Spain, Portugal and the UK) to 15 per cent on either side of parity. The wider margins eliminated the potential for speculative attacks, but left the system only the thinnest veneer of exchange rate coordination. This article seeks not to assess the causes of the crisis but rather to explain why the EMS governments did not defuse it with a realignment—the mechanism built into the ERM for precisely such occasions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document