Brussels, 22/04/2013 (Agence Europe) - The member states seem fired up with a single ambition: to conclude the budgetary negotiations as quickly as possible, if possible before the Irish Presidency of the EU Council finishes at the end of June. But they are by no means singing from the same hymn sheet over the concessions (flexibility, revision clause, own resources, budget unity) to be given to the European Parliament for the multi-annual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020, as shown by the deliberations of the General Affairs Council on Monday 22 April. The same goes for the adoption of the amending budget 2013, which has to happen ahead of any negotiations on the MFF.
Until the 2013 amending budget of €11.2 billion is adopted, the European Parliament will not start negotiations on the MFF. However, the Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland and Denmark), together with Slovakia and the Czech Republic, have repudiated any link between the two issues. According to the Swedish delegation, the amending budget should be dealt with by the Ecofin Council. In the opposite corner, Belgium, Spain, Poland, Romania and Slovenia have said that they are prepared to negotiate this amending budget in parallel with the MFF, if this will make it possible to achieve an agreement on the European budget quickly.
In fact, Irish Foreign Minister Eamon Gilmore has stated that the Irish Presidency was proposing to “move both procedures forward at the same time”. “I hope to meet the EP contact group this week. We have no time to lose in the talks on the MAFF”, he added. Because, he explained, “the essential priority in the next few weeks” is to ensure that “the Community programmes (are) in place in time for the start of next year”.
On the 2013 envelope, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands felt that the sum of €11.2 billion was too high. Like Paris and Berlin, London has called for this amount to be justified.
Another controversial issue is the revision clause the EP is insisting on for a mid-term review of the MFF. A rendezvous clause has been included only in the conclusions of the European Council. Several delegations (Greece, Italy, Belgium, France, Latvia and Cyprus) are not opposed to the idea of looking into this option. Slovakia called for caution, Portugal said that revision in 2016 would be too early and Hungary suggested that this be carried out in 2017.
Some countries stressed that a mid-term review should not mean any kind of lowest common denominator being applied to the limits currently negotiated. Net contributors, such as Germany, Austria, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, are prepared to give their agreement to this clause if, and only if, this revision, like the MFF itself, is adapted unanimously rather than by qualified majority.
Own resources a sticking point. The Parliament will struggle to win the sympathies of the Council over the reform of the system of own resources. Germany in particular is digging its heels in. Its Federal Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle has stated that there was no flexibility on this issue. Creating new resources would affect taxation, an approach that he is unable to countenance. However, several delegations (Slovenia, Latvia and the Czech Republic) have said that they are prepared to discuss this. France argued in favour of discussion going beyond the short term and Belgium even called for a timetable to be laid down.
It is more likely that the Parliament will get its way over flexibility. Some ten countries have expressed their interest in a measure of this kind. Others have observed that, in its February conclusions, the European Council made reference to this.
In light of these exchanges, which were described as constructive, Budget Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski said that all of the elements to start talks on the MAFF were on the table. (MD/transl.fl)