Example collocations logo

Union in sentence

2117 examples of Union in a sentence

Additional plans aimed at increasing eurozone countries’ accountability and effectiveness have followed, including a Europe-wide banking union, a common eurozone budget, limited debt mutualization (such as Eurobonds), and even a eurozone parliament separate from the existing European Union parliament.
Those Polish elections were the result of a compromise hammered out during weeks of "Round Table" negotiations between the leaders of the Communist party and representatives of the Solidarity trade union.
Rivero made his decision to go beyond the revolution's definition of journalism in 1989, when he broke from the writer's union and joined with nearly a dozen other intellectuals to sign an open letter raising the issue of political prisoners.
Some insist that the hatches must be battened down: fiscal consolidation, curtailment of union power, deregulation of markets.
In short, we seized the momentum of the crisis to provide a structural response to the challenges we faced, in particular by establishing a European banking union.
Today, the risk that the monetary union could disintegrate has diminished significantly – but the factors that fueled it remain largely unaddressed.
Some progress has been made on a European banking union.
The larger problem, of course, is that progress toward banking, fiscal, economic, and political union – all essential to the eurozone’s long-term viability – has been too slow.
Indeed, there has been no progress whatsoever on the latter three, while progress on the banking union has been limited.
Germany is resisting the risk-sharing elements of such a union: common deposit insurance, a common fund to wind up insolvent banks, and direct equity recapitalization of banks by the ESM.
Germany fears that risk-sharing would become risk-shifting, and that any form of fiscal union would likewise turn into a “transfer union,” with the rich core permanently subsidizing the poorer periphery.
Both boldness and consensus are urgently needed, and those who doubt that Europe is capable of either can take heart from two recent European Commission decisions: a politically ambitious proposal to force the complete separation of networks of pipelines and wires from the companies that supply gas and electricity; and a proposal that Gazprom and other non-EU businesses can control Union energy assets only if they meet tough new conditions, including reciprocal access to, say, Russia’s market for EU energy companies.
Gauck may not have gone far enough: At this point, an ever-closer union may be a political mirage.
So far, European integration has largely been a process of “falling forward,” with each stumble serving as a lesson from which a stronger union emerges.
For a fiscal union to function – however unlikely that outcome may be – a solid foundation is crucial.
None has even publicly pointed out that the referendum gave Prime Minister Theresa May no mandate to rule out membership of the European single market and customs union after Britain leaves the EU.
The “crisis within the crisis” exposed the eurozone’s weak governance and revived doubts about the viability of a monetary union with large competitiveness gaps between its members.
As it stands, the common denominator of existing eurozone-reform proposals is the completion of a banking union, which many believe is needed to reduce financial fragmentation and break the vicious circle between banks and sovereign debt.
But, while a banking union would be a positive step, it will be incomplete without efforts to reduce inequality.
It was French officials Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman who launched the initiative for European political union just after World War II with the call for a United States of Europe.
For the French, achieving a European political union is a way to increase Europe’s role in the world and France’s role within Europe.
Looking ahead, stopping the eurozone financial crisis does not require political union or a commitment of German financial support.
There has been no resort to the type of budgetary gimmicks that many European countries used to meet the deficit targets mandated for participation in monetary union by the Maastricht agreement.
America the LoserBERKELEY – The Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell recently recalled that when US President Donald Trump held a session for Harley-Davidson executives and union representatives at the White House in February 2017, he thanked them “for building things in America.”
Otmar Issing, one of the fathers of the common currency, correctly stated the principle on which it was founded: the euro was meant to be a monetary union, but not a political one.
Issing admits that he was among those who believed that “starting monetary union without having established a political union was putting the cart before the horse.”
They should begin by considering the two possible models for ensuring stability and debt sustainability in a monetary union: the mutualization model and the liability model.
In Europe, the absence of a political union – considered a necessary precondition for sharing debt obligations and, thus, putting the euro on a sound footing – is widely held to lie at the root of the continent’s crisis.
But the US crisis suggests that political union is no panacea for managing sovereign debt.
While political union may stabilize the euro, it will not sustain or strengthen democracy unless Europe’s leaders address this critical failing.
BackNext