News
BackOnly a day prior to the start of the EU budget summit with EU Heads of State and Government, a debate on the new EU Financial Framework 2014-2020 took place in the European Parliament, whereby the EU Commission President showed unfamiliar courage, demanding a commitment to the EU Financial Framework as an investment budget and to reduce unemployment and poverty. The majority of MEPs agreed with him and urged him to fight on. The only exception from these statements: British MEPs from the right-wing factions wanted significant spending cuts; some even went so far as to beat the drum for the abolition of the EU.
To begin with, Andreas Mavroyiannis from the Cyprus Presidency outlined the work, which had so far gone into the Multiannual EU Financial Framework 2014-2020. It was important to achieve a credible result of the negotiations in the Council. The current proposal in the Council was based on cuts of EUR 75 billion, compared to the proposal by the Commission (a total of EUR 1,025 billion spread over 7 years; respective 1.05 % of the EU gross national income). The objective would be a slim-line financial framework, based on which the targets could be implemented. All EU Member States had a veto right, as had the European Parliament; however, what was most important now was closing ranks and to emerge from the crisis, together and stronger.
EU Commission President Barroso: sharply criticises Council negotiations
EU Commission President was unusually clear when he put the Commission’ opinion in a nutshell: the EU Financial Framework was an investment budget. The EU 2020 targets (such as tackling unemployment and poverty) had to be implemented; the credibility of the European Union was at stake. Saving, saving, saving was the only mantra one heard. The Commission President painted a gloomy picture: if Europe does not invest, for example in the Connecting Europe Facility (transport, telecommunication), we will lose out to other economic regions. In particular the new Member States could not guarantee employment in the investment areas without structural funds. According to Barroso, 50 % of the funds were allocated to enterprises of the payer states; hence, the economic effects would be positive for both recipient and payer. Picking up on the criticism of some politicians, Barroso pointed out that the European Union would ensure in any case that the expenditure paid would have an added value. The Commission President also underlined the importance of the education and research sector.
Barroso outraged about the vast amount of money spent on banks compared to the small proportion spent on tackling poverty and unemployment
How are the citizens to understand that even though hundreds of billions of Euros are pumped into banks, it takes long discussions before a few million Euro are made available to tackle unemployment and poverty, said Barroso. About 25 million children in the EU were currently at risk of poverty and exclusion. Foreign aid was literally a matter of life and death, for example in respect of Syrian refugee camps, in Haiti or some African states. The EU should not turn its back to the rest of the world.
EU social partners are unilaterally against cuts in the EU Financial Framework
Even though they often found it difficult to agree on other issues, the EU social partners were united in their opinion that the EU budget should not be cut, said Barroso. Apart from that, projects had to receive funds in 2014 and not only at the last minute, i.e. in 2020. Concluding his speech, Barroso urged the Heads of State and Government to listen to Nobel Prize winners, Erasmus students, EU regions, enterprises and federations of trade unions, as well as to panels, the unemployed and humanitarian organisations, all of whom demanded that EU programmes were adequately funded. The voice of the EU Parliament had to be heard.
Joseph Daul: acting in a selfish manner would harm everybody
The President of the European Peoples’ Party, Joseph Daul supported Barroso: less than 1 percent for the EU Budget was not enough to implement the EU targets. Those, who thought, the EU was just a Single Market community, were wrong. The EU was also a community of values. In times like this, many EU Member States needed EU funds to carry out investments, said Daul. Lessons had to be learned from the past 60 years. This was not a time to be selfish as in the end this would harm all Member States. To cut EUR 400 million from the benefits of the poorest, as happened in case of one of the social programmes was out of the question! We want an affluent Europe; today, however, we are at a crossroads, cautioned Daul.
Hannes Swoboda criticises downwards bidding competition
EUR 50, 80 or 100 billion less - what was currently taking place at the Council, was a downwards bidding competition, criticised the President of the Social Democrats Hannes Swoboda. Europa had to fulfil responsibilities; one could not just look at figures. Swoboda welcomed Barroso’s speech: he should keep up his fighting spirit. Addressing the Council: Shall the unemployed live without EU support? Does the Council want to cut Erasmus programmes? asked the President of the Social Democrats. The European Parliament was prepared to make cuts; however, there had to be contributions from the EU budget. This was not the time for lame compromises.
Harsh criticism at the blockade policy of the British
The liberal President Guy Verhofstadt reserved his particular criticism for Great Britain’s blockade policy. At 140 billion per year, the European budget was very small in any case. National budgets had a volume 50 times as high. A strong EU budget was the only possibility to solve the problems of the Member States, underlined Verhofstadt his position. Similar statements were also made by the Greens and the Left.
Voices from the British right-wing factions: British in favour of leaving the EU, rather than continue paying
The British MEPs Martin Callanan of the European Conservatives and Nigel Farage of the faction “Europe of freedom and democracy” adopted a completely different tune: nobody would believe that the EU budget was an investment budget, as 40 % of the EU budget was spent on agriculture. Callanan also voiced his doubts that EU projects would represent money well spent. In Great Britain, even the Social Democrats were in favour of reducing the EU budget. Farage went even further: according to his information, two thirds of the British population would believe that it was better to leave the EU rather than continuing to pay for the Union. The EU budget was inflated in any case, said the two right-wing MEPs.
MEP Karas disappointed about the discussion style in some EU countries
Austrian MEP Othmar Karas who spoke at the end of discussion criticised the Heads of State and Government: it was sad to see where the discussion was going in some EU countries. The EU was a project to overcome nationalism and the EU had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because it had overcome nationalism. Hence, the Heads of Government should be less emotional and more objective when discussing the budget framework. Karas is convinced that fewer investments and less education and rural development would mean that it would be the citizens who are footing the bill in the end.
Difficult negotiations in the Council
And indeed, the negotiations on the EU Financial Framework 2014-2020 at Heads of State and Government level are proving to be extremely difficult. Several EU States have already threatened to use their veto. A number of so-called net payer states want to cut expenditure, whereby Great Britain has adopted a particular negative attitude - she insists on her very generous rebate on her EU membership contribution. The Heads of State and Government have been discussing the volume of the future EU budget since Thursday. If they fail to reach agreement, discussions could continue at the beginning of 2013. However, even if the Heads of Government come to a decision, there is still another hurdle to overcome: according to Parliament rapporteur Reimar Böge, the last Council proposal by Council President van Rompuy, which includes planned cuts of over EUR 75 billion Euro, is no longer capable of winning a majority in the European Parliament. The new EU Financial Framework cannot come into force without the approval of the European Parliament. Should that happen, time to reach an agreement is running out fast. In the worst case, and for the first time in the history of the European Union, the emergency plan could come into effect, whereby the current financial framework would continue. This would certainly not satisfy any of the negotiating parties; however, another facet would have been added to the EU crisis.
EU Commission President Barroso: sharply criticises Council negotiations
EU Commission President was unusually clear when he put the Commission’ opinion in a nutshell: the EU Financial Framework was an investment budget. The EU 2020 targets (such as tackling unemployment and poverty) had to be implemented; the credibility of the European Union was at stake. Saving, saving, saving was the only mantra one heard. The Commission President painted a gloomy picture: if Europe does not invest, for example in the Connecting Europe Facility (transport, telecommunication), we will lose out to other economic regions. In particular the new Member States could not guarantee employment in the investment areas without structural funds. According to Barroso, 50 % of the funds were allocated to enterprises of the payer states; hence, the economic effects would be positive for both recipient and payer. Picking up on the criticism of some politicians, Barroso pointed out that the European Union would ensure in any case that the expenditure paid would have an added value. The Commission President also underlined the importance of the education and research sector.
Barroso outraged about the vast amount of money spent on banks compared to the small proportion spent on tackling poverty and unemployment
How are the citizens to understand that even though hundreds of billions of Euros are pumped into banks, it takes long discussions before a few million Euro are made available to tackle unemployment and poverty, said Barroso. About 25 million children in the EU were currently at risk of poverty and exclusion. Foreign aid was literally a matter of life and death, for example in respect of Syrian refugee camps, in Haiti or some African states. The EU should not turn its back to the rest of the world.
EU social partners are unilaterally against cuts in the EU Financial Framework
Even though they often found it difficult to agree on other issues, the EU social partners were united in their opinion that the EU budget should not be cut, said Barroso. Apart from that, projects had to receive funds in 2014 and not only at the last minute, i.e. in 2020. Concluding his speech, Barroso urged the Heads of State and Government to listen to Nobel Prize winners, Erasmus students, EU regions, enterprises and federations of trade unions, as well as to panels, the unemployed and humanitarian organisations, all of whom demanded that EU programmes were adequately funded. The voice of the EU Parliament had to be heard.
Joseph Daul: acting in a selfish manner would harm everybody
The President of the European Peoples’ Party, Joseph Daul supported Barroso: less than 1 percent for the EU Budget was not enough to implement the EU targets. Those, who thought, the EU was just a Single Market community, were wrong. The EU was also a community of values. In times like this, many EU Member States needed EU funds to carry out investments, said Daul. Lessons had to be learned from the past 60 years. This was not a time to be selfish as in the end this would harm all Member States. To cut EUR 400 million from the benefits of the poorest, as happened in case of one of the social programmes was out of the question! We want an affluent Europe; today, however, we are at a crossroads, cautioned Daul.
Hannes Swoboda criticises downwards bidding competition
EUR 50, 80 or 100 billion less - what was currently taking place at the Council, was a downwards bidding competition, criticised the President of the Social Democrats Hannes Swoboda. Europa had to fulfil responsibilities; one could not just look at figures. Swoboda welcomed Barroso’s speech: he should keep up his fighting spirit. Addressing the Council: Shall the unemployed live without EU support? Does the Council want to cut Erasmus programmes? asked the President of the Social Democrats. The European Parliament was prepared to make cuts; however, there had to be contributions from the EU budget. This was not the time for lame compromises.
Harsh criticism at the blockade policy of the British
The liberal President Guy Verhofstadt reserved his particular criticism for Great Britain’s blockade policy. At 140 billion per year, the European budget was very small in any case. National budgets had a volume 50 times as high. A strong EU budget was the only possibility to solve the problems of the Member States, underlined Verhofstadt his position. Similar statements were also made by the Greens and the Left.
Voices from the British right-wing factions: British in favour of leaving the EU, rather than continue paying
The British MEPs Martin Callanan of the European Conservatives and Nigel Farage of the faction “Europe of freedom and democracy” adopted a completely different tune: nobody would believe that the EU budget was an investment budget, as 40 % of the EU budget was spent on agriculture. Callanan also voiced his doubts that EU projects would represent money well spent. In Great Britain, even the Social Democrats were in favour of reducing the EU budget. Farage went even further: according to his information, two thirds of the British population would believe that it was better to leave the EU rather than continuing to pay for the Union. The EU budget was inflated in any case, said the two right-wing MEPs.
MEP Karas disappointed about the discussion style in some EU countries
Austrian MEP Othmar Karas who spoke at the end of discussion criticised the Heads of State and Government: it was sad to see where the discussion was going in some EU countries. The EU was a project to overcome nationalism and the EU had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because it had overcome nationalism. Hence, the Heads of Government should be less emotional and more objective when discussing the budget framework. Karas is convinced that fewer investments and less education and rural development would mean that it would be the citizens who are footing the bill in the end.
Difficult negotiations in the Council
And indeed, the negotiations on the EU Financial Framework 2014-2020 at Heads of State and Government level are proving to be extremely difficult. Several EU States have already threatened to use their veto. A number of so-called net payer states want to cut expenditure, whereby Great Britain has adopted a particular negative attitude - she insists on her very generous rebate on her EU membership contribution. The Heads of State and Government have been discussing the volume of the future EU budget since Thursday. If they fail to reach agreement, discussions could continue at the beginning of 2013. However, even if the Heads of Government come to a decision, there is still another hurdle to overcome: according to Parliament rapporteur Reimar Böge, the last Council proposal by Council President van Rompuy, which includes planned cuts of over EUR 75 billion Euro, is no longer capable of winning a majority in the European Parliament. The new EU Financial Framework cannot come into force without the approval of the European Parliament. Should that happen, time to reach an agreement is running out fast. In the worst case, and for the first time in the history of the European Union, the emergency plan could come into effect, whereby the current financial framework would continue. This would certainly not satisfy any of the negotiating parties; however, another facet would have been added to the EU crisis.