Brussels, 21/03/2012 (Agence Europe) - COREPER (the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States to the EU) has for the first time debated a partial “negotiating box” on the multi-annual financial framework 2014-2020, and has confirmed differences of opinion, notably on the total envelope and funds outside the budget (including the reserve for the management of agricultural crises). The General Affairs Council held in Brussels on Monday 26 March will hold a public debate on this negotiating box dossier.
The planned negotiating box covers headings 1 (with the exception of cohesion and the Connecting Europe Facility), 3 (justice, home affairs, citizenship), 4 (external action) and 5 (administration). It therefore does not include heading 2, where agricultural expenditure features. The aim of this document is to identify the subjects to be discussed during the negotiations.
At the meeting of COREPER, several delegations (including Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Finland, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden and the Czech Republic) reiterated their preference for reducing the total upper limit of the financial framework 2014-2020 to current levels, and therefore criticised the increases proposed by the Commission. Some of the new member states of the EU call for macroeconomic conditionality (suspension of funds in the event of budgetary slippage) to apply to all EU funds, not just to the five funds covered by the joint strategic framework (structural funds). The so-called net contributor countries called for concrete measures to be taken regarding the commitments outstanding (RAL).
Heading 1. The so-called cohesion countries asked to keep the current sub-heading for cohesion and many delegations asked for all countries to have assured access to the research funds.
Heading 3. A handful of member states (France, Italy and Austria) asked for a cultural programme to be included in the negotiating box and some (Sweden and Poland) spoke in favour of adding a justice programme.
Heading 4. Mainly the Eastern member states called for greater emphasis to be laid on the neighbourhood policy. Some countries feel that the focus on pre-accession and enlargement should be increased.
Heading 5. Several countries feel that further savings are possible in the administrative expenses.
Funds outside the budget and other funds. Some of the new member states called for the ITER (nuclear reactor) and GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security) funds to be placed outside the budget (as proposed by the Commission), whereas the net contributor countries would rather keep them inside, for greater transparency. Some countries, such as Germany and the United Kingdom, called for the globalisation solidarity fund to be abolished. A handful of countries (again including Germany and the United Kingdom) opposed the creation of a reserve for the management of agricultural crises, whilst others (Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg) are in favour of this. Most countries which took the floor on the issue of the European Development Fund were in favour of keeping it outside the EU budget. (LC/transl.fl)