News
BackIt looks as if the patience of the European Commission and the European Parliament with the Council and its crisis management has almost run out. EU Commission President Barroso and most of the MEPs are reacting increasingly indignant to the cloak-and-dagger operations of the Council within the scope of tackling the crisis at EU level. Barroso is obviously fed up that Commission and European Parliament have recently been side-lined by representatives of the Council. The MEPs in turn do not want to stand by and watch how the European Union is driven to the wall by Council representatives and demand that the European Council at last starts dealing with the essential issues of crisis management.
The original purpose of the debate of the European Parliament with the Commission and the Council had been to concentrate on the coming EU budget framework. However, in actual fact, both Commission and MEPs used the opportunity to vent their frustration about the conduct of the Council towards the two other EU institutions.
Barroso: we do not want to advance without the participation of the European Parliament
In his opening statement, EU Commission President José Manuel Barroso emphasised how important the measures taken so far were for dealing with the EU crisis. However, when it came to tackling unemployment, one was confronted with a major challenge. The European Social Fund would include measures to deal with youth employment, said the Commission President. Another important issue was to combat increasing poverty. Barroso’s comments became more explicit in the second part of his speech: given the urgency of the situation, it was time to conclude an inter-institutional agreement on the growth initiative. It was important to take key decisions and to send a strong signal to the outside. An important factor of the growth initiative was to involve the European Parliament – “without whom we cannot advance and without whom the Commission does not want to advance”, said Commission President Barroso showing surprisingly fighting spirit.
The Commission President also seemed not to be very pleased with the Council negotiations on the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020. Speedy adoption of the coming budgetary framework was urgently needed to signal seriousness in respect of economic growth. However, some Member States would regard the EU budget as an extravagance intent on reducing the framework by EUR 100 billion – this was the wrong approach; just now, funds for growth and employment were urgently needed. This was also confirmed by figures from 2009: in Hungary, 97 % of public investments had come from EU funds, 78 % in Lithuania, more than 50 % in Poland; the situation had been similar in many other countries. “What would the situation be in these countries without the contribution of the European budget” was the rhetoric question of the Commission President. New own resources, such as the Financial Transaction Tax would improve the position of the EU budget and relieve pressure on the Member States.
Addressing the general economic situation, Barroso said that a banking union would be necessary, however, had to be accompanied by a fiscal union. More coordination in taxation policy was also required.
MEP Joseph Daul warns his party colleagues in the European Council
The leader of the Parliamentary group of the European People’s Party, Joseph Daul made a surprising statement: it was high time that the European Council would address important issues instead of only deciding on individual aid initiatives. This would apply in particular to the representatives of his own party, the European People’s Party. Over the past 60 years, Europe’s Community method has provided peace and wealth, said Daul. We want a social and fiscal model. At the European Council Meeting on 28th and 29th June, the Heads of State and Government had to decide in favour of integration that would actually work. Emergency actions for individual Member States would not be sufficient. Any action taken should not once again be too little and too late – we should not find ourselves with our backs against the wall again, said Daul in a dramatic appeal to the Council. In addition, the leader of the Parliamentary group of the European People’s Party emphasised that the European Parliament would make its position very clear should the European Rat once again fail to address the important issues.
The President of the European Parliament had to be involved in the Committees of the Council and not be forced to leave the chamber every time the debate turned to key issues. It was not acceptable that the President of the European Central Bank was fully involved but not the President of the European Parliament, criticised Daul.
MEP Hannes Swoboda: a growth initiative must have substance
Hannes Swoboda, the President of the Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, was also surprised by these statements. He hoped, that Daul would speak for the whole European People’s Party and that he did not only voice his own personal opinion. He would definitely applaud Daul’s speech. An inter-institutional agreement for growth as suggested by Barroso was good; however, it needed substance. What could one say to young people who had no job? The debt problem had to be solved together, but unfortunately there was a lack of courage.
For Swoboda, the EU budget represents an element of the growth strategy. Hence, it would not make sense to reduce the EU budget, as it had more growth potential than some national budgets. He was also in favour of a high level of efficiency, but cohesion and infrastructure funds would be necessary. The EU Budget is small in size in any case. However, if no agreement could be reached with the Council, the (higher) on-going EU financial framework would simply be carried forward, said a relaxed Hannes Swoboda. The European Parliament could live with that, and he would hope the Council could do the same.
MEP Guy Verhofstadt demands quick legislative proposals from the Commission
The Liberal speaker Guy Verhofstadt commented there was not much he could add to what the previous speaker Daul had said. However, he urged the Council that decisions such as the banking union and a fiscal union with a debt repayment fund had to be taken now. The Commission had to publish relevant legislative proposals. What was needed was a systemic solution, not just individual financial support measures. There was no time to again wait for elections to take place in a Member State. Referring to the EU budget, Verhofstadt said that in any country of the world Parliament would have a say with regard to the own resources in a budget, apart from the European Parliament. He demands for the European Parliament to be given a voice and subsequently threatened the Council that his faction would reject the multiannual financial framework if the EU budget would not provide for own resources.
The only factions, who were not in agreement with the opinions of Daul, Swoboda and Verhofstadt, were the European Conservative faction that is dominated by the British and the Europe of Freedom and Democracy faction. They see Europa just a step away from the next serious crisis and the Euro failing. In their opinion the EU budget was associated with mismanagement, waste and fraud. They do not want any more “badly spent” money.
In about 2 weeks it will show whether the Heads of State and Governments are taking the criticism of Commission and European Parliament seriously. Should the European Council once again only give preference to individual measures, Commission and Parliament will finally lose their patience.
Barroso: we do not want to advance without the participation of the European Parliament
In his opening statement, EU Commission President José Manuel Barroso emphasised how important the measures taken so far were for dealing with the EU crisis. However, when it came to tackling unemployment, one was confronted with a major challenge. The European Social Fund would include measures to deal with youth employment, said the Commission President. Another important issue was to combat increasing poverty. Barroso’s comments became more explicit in the second part of his speech: given the urgency of the situation, it was time to conclude an inter-institutional agreement on the growth initiative. It was important to take key decisions and to send a strong signal to the outside. An important factor of the growth initiative was to involve the European Parliament – “without whom we cannot advance and without whom the Commission does not want to advance”, said Commission President Barroso showing surprisingly fighting spirit.
The Commission President also seemed not to be very pleased with the Council negotiations on the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020. Speedy adoption of the coming budgetary framework was urgently needed to signal seriousness in respect of economic growth. However, some Member States would regard the EU budget as an extravagance intent on reducing the framework by EUR 100 billion – this was the wrong approach; just now, funds for growth and employment were urgently needed. This was also confirmed by figures from 2009: in Hungary, 97 % of public investments had come from EU funds, 78 % in Lithuania, more than 50 % in Poland; the situation had been similar in many other countries. “What would the situation be in these countries without the contribution of the European budget” was the rhetoric question of the Commission President. New own resources, such as the Financial Transaction Tax would improve the position of the EU budget and relieve pressure on the Member States.
Addressing the general economic situation, Barroso said that a banking union would be necessary, however, had to be accompanied by a fiscal union. More coordination in taxation policy was also required.
MEP Joseph Daul warns his party colleagues in the European Council
The leader of the Parliamentary group of the European People’s Party, Joseph Daul made a surprising statement: it was high time that the European Council would address important issues instead of only deciding on individual aid initiatives. This would apply in particular to the representatives of his own party, the European People’s Party. Over the past 60 years, Europe’s Community method has provided peace and wealth, said Daul. We want a social and fiscal model. At the European Council Meeting on 28th and 29th June, the Heads of State and Government had to decide in favour of integration that would actually work. Emergency actions for individual Member States would not be sufficient. Any action taken should not once again be too little and too late – we should not find ourselves with our backs against the wall again, said Daul in a dramatic appeal to the Council. In addition, the leader of the Parliamentary group of the European People’s Party emphasised that the European Parliament would make its position very clear should the European Rat once again fail to address the important issues.
The President of the European Parliament had to be involved in the Committees of the Council and not be forced to leave the chamber every time the debate turned to key issues. It was not acceptable that the President of the European Central Bank was fully involved but not the President of the European Parliament, criticised Daul.
MEP Hannes Swoboda: a growth initiative must have substance
Hannes Swoboda, the President of the Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, was also surprised by these statements. He hoped, that Daul would speak for the whole European People’s Party and that he did not only voice his own personal opinion. He would definitely applaud Daul’s speech. An inter-institutional agreement for growth as suggested by Barroso was good; however, it needed substance. What could one say to young people who had no job? The debt problem had to be solved together, but unfortunately there was a lack of courage.
For Swoboda, the EU budget represents an element of the growth strategy. Hence, it would not make sense to reduce the EU budget, as it had more growth potential than some national budgets. He was also in favour of a high level of efficiency, but cohesion and infrastructure funds would be necessary. The EU Budget is small in size in any case. However, if no agreement could be reached with the Council, the (higher) on-going EU financial framework would simply be carried forward, said a relaxed Hannes Swoboda. The European Parliament could live with that, and he would hope the Council could do the same.
MEP Guy Verhofstadt demands quick legislative proposals from the Commission
The Liberal speaker Guy Verhofstadt commented there was not much he could add to what the previous speaker Daul had said. However, he urged the Council that decisions such as the banking union and a fiscal union with a debt repayment fund had to be taken now. The Commission had to publish relevant legislative proposals. What was needed was a systemic solution, not just individual financial support measures. There was no time to again wait for elections to take place in a Member State. Referring to the EU budget, Verhofstadt said that in any country of the world Parliament would have a say with regard to the own resources in a budget, apart from the European Parliament. He demands for the European Parliament to be given a voice and subsequently threatened the Council that his faction would reject the multiannual financial framework if the EU budget would not provide for own resources.
The only factions, who were not in agreement with the opinions of Daul, Swoboda and Verhofstadt, were the European Conservative faction that is dominated by the British and the Europe of Freedom and Democracy faction. They see Europa just a step away from the next serious crisis and the Euro failing. In their opinion the EU budget was associated with mismanagement, waste and fraud. They do not want any more “badly spent” money.
In about 2 weeks it will show whether the Heads of State and Governments are taking the criticism of Commission and European Parliament seriously. Should the European Council once again only give preference to individual measures, Commission and Parliament will finally lose their patience.