In December 2010, Re-Define produced one of the first blueprints for the European Stability Mechanism "An Optimal Design for the ESM" targeted at EU policy makers. After more than six months of discussions and political wrangling, today the ESM treaty was signed in a ceremony in Brussels. Now is an ideal time to evaluate the final shape of the ESM and to compare it to our blueprint. This short policy commentary, part of our new series of publications, aims to do exactly that. First we highlight the proposals Re-Define made, then we discuss what the ESM treaty actually provides for.
The legal form
Re-Define suggested that though it may be preferable embed the ESM in the legal structure of the EU (as is the case for the European Investment Bank), it was probably much easier to set it up as an international financial institution based on an intergovernmental treaty between Euro area member states using the EBRD as a model.
This is the model the Euro area member states have chosen and the ESM will be set up as a treaty based international financial institution located in Luxembourg with Euro area member states as members.
The size
Re-Define suggested that the ESM should have a lending capacity that is enough to meet around a third of the Euro area's sovereign issuance for a period of two years – between Euro 600 bn and Euro 750 bn. We also suggested that an upward flexibility should be included in the agreement in case of contingencies.
A growing consensus of analysts and informed commentators have criticized both the EU’s handling of the growing sovereign crisis in the Euro area as well as its proposed plans for future reform supposedly designed to prevent a recurrence of this crisis. There is an urgent need to change course.
Our latest paper (download here) offers several new suggestions on how best to 1) institutionalize a successful and credible crisis management response in the EU in the short and long term 2) improve the existing European Financial Stability Facility 3) construct a permanent European Stabilization Mechanism.
This Policy Maker Brief aggregates the advice Re-Define has provided to a number of European Finance Ministries, the European Parliament and the European Commission in a single place and in a format best suited for decisions by the Euro group of finance ministers and leaders on the design of the permanent European Stabilization Mechanism.
2 hours 29 min ago —
Irony? “@moorehn: I assume UK will stop criticizing US gun laws after meat-cleaver street beheading? http://t.co/sb5mLVZ1Xj”
3 hours 41 min ago —
I will be defending the #FTT (the concept not necessarily the #EU model) at a panel discussion at #CSFI tomorrow cc @robinhood@oxfamgb
4 hours 2 min ago —
Would you agree that a) wealth should be taxed b) income should be taxed (ideally at the same rate) no matter what it's source?
4 hours 41 min ago —
RT @ottocrat: When I left the office it was a horrible murder; by the time I got home is was “Britain under terror attack!” Get. A. Grip.
4 hours 54 min ago —
Serious question: what's the difference between a 'terror attack' and 'cold blooded murder'?
In December 2010, Re-Define produced one of the first blueprints for the European Stability Mechanism "
A growing consensus of analysts and informed commentators have criticized both the EU’s handling of the growing sovereign crisis in the Euro area as well as its proposed plans for future reform supposedly designed to prevent a recurrence of this crisis. There is an urgent need to change course. 
This