Brussels, 12/09/2011 (Agence Europe) - Eight EU member states called on Monday 12 September for the Commission to trim their proposals on the next EU multiannual financial framework (2014-2020). The General Affairs Council agreed on the proposed length of the next financial framework (seven years), while a number of delegations were critical of the flexibility of the framework and of the creation of new instruments outside the multiannual financial framework.
“The Commission's proposals for the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 comes at a time member states are making considerable financial efforts to support Europe and at the same time are undertaking tough consolidation efforts. European public spending cannot be exempt from these considerable national efforts”, says a statement signed by eight countries, Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
These countries take the view that the Commission proposals on the 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework are “too high”. They argue that “the increases of spending over the next MFF are significantly in excess of what is needed for a stabilisation of the European budget. The new MFF should not lead to an increase in national contributions to the EU budget. Accordingly, total spending for the 2014-2020 period needs to be substantially lower in order to meet these criteria.”
The eight signatories of the statement call, too, for the MFF to cover all spending “in a complete and transparent way”. In conclusion, they say that the best use has to be made of the EU budget to create better conditions for growth and make Europe more competitive. “We need to spend better, not to spend more”, they say.
The eight are all net contributors to the EU budget. In total, and counting items outside the EU budget, the Commission proposal for the period 2014-2020 amounts to €1,083 billion, a 5% increase. Germany stated that the proposal would have to be reduced by around €100 billion to begin to make it more acceptable.
“Our budget is to be seen as part of consolidation efforts of national finances. We are not increasing it. Our philosophy consists of financing more Europe with the same levels of money taking account only of inflation” was the response from European Budget Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski at the press conference which followed the General Affairs Council. “We are freezing administrative spending”, he said, too. He called on member states to agree on creating new own resources for the EU.
On behalf of the Presidency of the Council of the EU, Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, Polish Secretary of State for European Affairs, said that the statement from the eight countries contained no surprises. The document would not affect negotiations on the financial framework, he suggested, as proposals are currently at the technical evaluation stage. Budgetary rigour is a key factor at this point, and no one is putting it in any doubt, he said. “When the time comes, we will have to decide on the figures. That will happen in the course of 2012”, he noted.
Length, structure, flexibility. At a working lunch, general affairs ministers discussed the length, structure and flexibility of the forthcoming multiannual financial framework. The Commission is proposing that the MFF last seven years. This was backed by all delegations.
The Commission proposal on the structure has, in general, found the backing of the member states. Some countries, however, expressed doubts over the future merging of current sub-headings 1a (competitiveness) and 1b (cohesion) into a single heading 1 (smart, inclusive growth) and over the creation of a sub-ceiling for economic, social and territorial cohesion in the new heading 1. The countries which framed these criticisms were some of the cohesion countries, such as Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia and Lithuania.
The net contributor countries criticised the creation of new instruments outside the multiannual financial framework: funds for the experimental ITER reactor and the GMES (Global Monitoring of Environment and Security) initiative and the new reserve for agricultural crises. Sweden claimed that these instruments outside the financial framework endangered budgetary discipline.
Several countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Denmark and Latvia) opposed Commission proposals for making the 2014-2020 MFF more flexible. (L.C./transl.rt)