yes, the markets influence things, but only because countries need to keep borrowing because they haven't managed their economies well.
If you have to borrow money (otherwise you have to stop paying benefits and salaries) then you have to pay the interest rates at that time - you can't force people (i.e. markets) to lend to you at low interest rates.
That is why getting rid of the structural deficit is so important.

The online BBC news magazine has this useful summary point concerning the advantages of having unelected rulers: "They can implement unpopular policies".

Priceless.

Thanks for all the comments so far. I thought two, from Carlo Turco and Jacob Lester, needed a proper response so I've added one to my own blog. http://bit.ly/tyW8Vt

Enjoy!

Remember the euro launch in 2000 anyone- i know for many history aint a strong point...
What happend when france and germany dictated that there would be convergence of bond yields at the beginning of the euro is why we are here- politicians dictated to the markets, and the market was MADE to go along with this, that german paper was almost as credit worthy as greek (that's a madness i will never forget)- and the reason we have a crisis now is cos the market evntually has re-established itself and concluded that actually german and greek credit ain't of the same value- It unfortunately took this long because precisely the debt had to become so big that not even politician clowns backed by their clown economists could paper up the cracks. Proof? the 2 biggest holders of the greek rubbish, french and german banks surprise surprise... and now that those 2 are halfway shifting that manure off their balence sheets onto the ECB (and therefore taxpayers) , it's reset for the bank and the politiclowns get to put their pawn in place.
Please, when responding if lefties took off their hate filled spectacles they might se the market for what it is- a name, that's all, and they might actually present some challenge to the hedgemony of big business rather than carry on it's anti right prattle...

We pay to much heed to the financial markets too - the tail wagging the dog again. Perhaps if a few big banks did go under and the markets plunged then we would at least 'be all in it together' .

As it stands the 1% continue to game the system.

I agree with much of this - global finance is now directly (rather than the normal 'indirectly')dictating who should be the leader of two countries.

On the other hand the fact that a bufoon like Berlusconi was voted into power doesn't reflect well on the Italian electorate.

this is a bit nonsense

we are to be happy that the mafia man is replaced by a builderberg man

they are the same, as evidenced by the dodgy investements they make in the city of london along with the vatican.

highly dodgy if you ask me all round.

plus mandy is far better than cameron in my opinion, he at least has humour

Good article!

This latest crisis has revealed the true nature of the EU (or rather France and Germany) and their 100% sickening obeisance to the "markets" and bankers who created the very crisis which has now swept away Berlusconi, Papandreou, Brown, the Spanish socialists etc..

We are now in a world where the markets (that is the finance industry) have directly placed their unelected servants into power, as opposed to ruling through their elected servants like Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron..

Unless we leave the EU at once, and do all we can to destroy this disgusting anti-democratic charade, we are not fit to be called "democratic" nations any more.. I am apoplectic!

Indeed. Of course it has happened here, if with a degree of democratic cover. We cannot now vote for a party which has not, tacitly, kissed the hands of the financial elite behind the Greek and Italian coups. I knew, when Bliar began to push pro-market "reforms", that our democracy was dead. We must march to the corporatocracy's drum, or nothing.

So is there anyone left who still labours under the delusion that the EU is democratic? If you do, you need taking outside.

I share your alarm at the lack of democratic mandate in these countries, and the overriding of the rights of the electorate, but is it not also a sad comment on how ineffective and hollowed out democracy has become?

Imagine it were to happen here. Would electors rise up to defend any of the present lot (all parties) who have systematically ignored their interests and wishes?

Generally good points here, but as for Berlusconi leaving and this new guy coming in, that's not undemocratic, in any parliamentary democracy the Prime Minister does not owe his position to the people but the ministers, it is the ministers who owe their position to the people.

This means that when a politician resigns there needs to be a re-election, but PM's are "one among equals" and are there because the majority of politicians will let him be there, the only reason they have any power is because of party systems and people wanting some kind of agenda to be achieved.

So Berlusconi's departure does not prompt another election, but the reach of finance over Italy is certainly worrying, especially since everything they demanded so far has been very damaging to the world economy.

If this was happening anywhere else but Europe, we would all be saying how terrible this was. Granted these leaders are not being appointed through force or violence, but it all seems very clinical and sums up what an erosion of democracy Europe has become. Basically, voting means nothing! Why vote ever again? The financial institutions and economists are running(or ruining) the show and Merkel and Sarky are completely out of their depth and don't have a clue what to do.

Please do show me in which meeting "the markets" sat down, negotiated and chose Monti as a PM.

The elected Italian parliamentarians chose Monti. And it is true that the situation has arisen because "the markets" have put pressure on the Italian government by raising the interest rate they want for Italian bonds. But why is this? It is a result of poor economic management by Italian politicians, which have increased the risk of Italy being unable to pay back what they borrow, which logically reflects in the price of borrowing. Lenders lend money to earn money, not to lose them or out of some altruistic good graces.
There are no unified "markets" who decide anything. There's only politicians who make bad decisions and are exposed to the pressure that their irresponsibility has led to.

Richard Morris' article betrays ignorance of how parliamentarian political systems works, especially the fact that PMs are not directly elected, and how bond markets work. Being British, where the PM isn't directly elected either, I find it astonishing that he does not understand such basics of the political system. Or maybe he does, and he just wanted to make a scare-mongering populist article.