The time has come to define the budgetary future of the EU. So, here we are. One of the fundamental dossiers for the future of Europe is open: that of the financial perspectives 2014-2020. In fact, this has been under discussion for some time, but the debates were, for the most part, theoretical. At the moment, as preparations for the EU budget for 2013 are getting to the matter in hand, we note that everything is linked and that the arguments stressed for next year are already targeting budgetary orientations up to 2020. We all know the two conflicting theories in the debate: one side feels that the austerity policies applied nationally by individual member states should also be valid at European level (as we know, the budget of the EU is financed almost exclusively by the contributions of the national budgets); the others take the view that the EU should keep in place, and even step up, support to the less-favoured member states and multiply European investments to reinforce cooperation and cohesion. These are mostly paid for by the “net contributor” countries, which pay more into the pot than they take back out.
Compromises are tough. The new member states (recent and future) belong to the category of less-favoured beneficiaries of the European budget; the older ones, which received help in the past, have become net contributors, and even Spain is nearly there. Alain Lamassoure, chair of the competent committee of the European Parliament, has stressed that the payment appropriations are already insufficient, particularly to fund the cohesion policy (see EUROPE 10575). These are highly technical dossiers in which it is hard to get the general public interested, as people have always had the impression that the EU spends too much anyway, without realising that its budget directly finances farmers, the fishing industry, common infrastructure and so on. Mr Lamassoure warns: we have to negotiate and prepare the orientations for the future this year, because next year, the budgetary cycle which will run until 2020 already needs to be in place. But there are conflicts between the positions of the member states and it is hard to get public opinion mobilised on the issues of principle which, at the end of the day, will determine the specific funding.
Public procurement and reciprocity. No surprises there: the European Commission has proposed the legislative instrument which will call on the commercial partners of the EU to open up their public procurement contracts more to European businesses, in order to bring in reasonable reciprocity in this complex and economically significant area (see EUROPE of Saturday 17). The Commission aims to introduce the principle of reciprocity of commitments between the EU and countries such as Brazil, Russia, China and India. Two comments: (a) all of the member states were aware of this initiative by the Commission and Mr Sarkozy, quoting it in a speech a few days ahead of time, gave nothing away; (b) the Commission decided against the idea of a Buy European Act, which it felt would attract tit-for-tat measures from third countries.
It is not desirable for this dossier, and others linked to the trade policy of the EU, to be seen as election campaign subjects, because it is the European interest which is at stake.
Three comments on Hungary. Viktor Orban's upsurge in national pride should be met calmly. The Hungarian prime minister has declared that his country will never be a “colony” and that his citizens will not be “second-class European citizens”, adding that they would not give up their constitution (see EUROPE 10576). Three tiny points of information: (a) respecting Community rules is not optional, it is obligatory; (b) as guardian of the Treaty, the European Commission has a duty to make sure that the rules are respected and the authority to suspend European funding if necessary: the EU is not a subsidy machine, but a community in which rights and obligations go hand in hand; (c) each member state has the right to decide not to participate in additional progress in European integration, which basically means that two-speed Europe is already a reality.
And it goes without saying that the above considerations apply to all member states.
Behind the scenes… Indiscretions are not a habit of ours, but sometimes they can have a certain appeal. According to our colleagues at the Belgian newspaper Le Soir, high-ranking members of several significant political groups at the European Parliament are putting together, by initiative of Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a “primary” election to appoint the candidate for the presidency of the European Commission in 2014.
The objective of this is apparently to present an alternative to the man or woman who will stand as the candidate of the largest group, the EPP. According to the talks underway, the candidates for this initiative are believed to be: Guy Verhofstadt for the Liberals; Martin Schulz, current president of the EP, for the Socialists; Jean-Luc Mélenchon, currently an active protagonist in the presidential campaigns in France, for the radical Left. And of course Mr Cohn-Bendit himself for the Greens, if they decide to choose him. The common objective is to appoint “the president of the Commission of tomorrow, the president of a social, ecological and democratic Commission”.
All united in this project, the candidates would obviously become rivals as soon as their candidate is appointed, and it will be interesting to see what happens with the election campaign amongst themselves, as soon as they are in competition… According to the indiscretions, Guy Verhofstadt is believed to have “never digested his defeat in 2004 in the race for the Commission presidency”.
Again according to Le Soir, there is also a broader project in the pipeline, that of Graham Watson, who is believed to be planning to create a powerful political force, representing the Centre, as an alternative to the EPP. In 2014, it will present not only a candidate for the presidency of the European Commission, but also candidates for the presidency of the Council and for the post of high representative for foreign policy. At first sight, it might not be all that easy for Mr Watson to get the European Council to agree to allow the EP to appoint its president… (FR/transl.fl)