Brussels, 12/06/2013 (Agence Europe) - Although the Irish Presidency of the Council of Ministers has said that “positive momentum has been accelerated”, which could portend an upcoming agreement on the EU's 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework (MFF), the European Parliament is being much more cautious and considers that the battle is tough - especially on the flexibility of the budget.
The trialogue in Strasbourg on 11 June certainly enabled progress in the discussions between the institutions on the MFF - but the differences remain deep between the Council and European Parliament. The momentum spoken about by the Irish Presidency is occurring at the speed of a tortoise rather than a hare, said Alain Lamassoure (EEP, France), chair of the European Parliament's budgets committee, at a press conference in Strasbourg during the morning of Wednesday 12 June.
He reiterated that, for the Parliament, the compromise reached at the European Council on 8 February is “extremely disappointing”, especially on the figures. “The European Parliament cannot take the responsibility for sentencing the EU (institutions in future) to seven years of austerity and reduction in EU budgetary resources - at a time when the EU needs more resources for financing new competences resulting from the Lisbon Treaty, for financing the Agenda 2020 objectives, and for tackling new unforeseen needs”, Lamassoure stated. It is for this reason that the Parliament only accepts the risk of a reduction in resources if it is a provisional reduction, if the resources are better used, and if “we are able to launch an initiative to recast the EU budget on new own resources that are separate from national budgets”.
The Parliament is therefore calling for: - a mid-term revision clause “after next year's elections” for spending and revenue; - the start of a process enabling the financing of the European budget to be recast on new foundations (new own resources); - the EU to be able to have the total funds, if necessary, including margins for commitment appropriations and payment appropriations. “The main difficulty is flexibility.” Lamassoure believes that the Parliament's arguments are supported by the recent unplanned events at the February European Council: - aid to Cyprus (it would be impossible to allocate €300 million for the cohesion policy in Cyprus without taking some from other countries); - the EU solidarity fund has nothing left in 2013 to be able to compensate victims of natural disasters; - the youth employment initiative (the European Council is calling for flexibility on commitment appropriations, but wants to limit the flexibility just to this project, Lamassoure recalled); - the commitments proposed by the European Commission to finance energy infrastructure in the EU were reduced by two thirds by the European Council. “The Council doesn't want to know about this flexibility that we are demanding for the next MFF. It is ready to accept something, uniquely on payments, and on condition that it is capped”, Lamassoure said.
Lastly, the Parliament will not budge on the link between the next MFF and the release of the payment appropriations needed for 2013 (€11.2 billion, the first tranche of €7.3 billion having been paid out).
The Parliament will study in detail the Council's proposals on flexibility and its link with the revision clause. There will be fresh meetings this week at the technical level, and another trialogue in Brussels on Tuesday 18 June at 6.00pm.
During a plenary debate, President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso called on the countries of the EU to accept the justified requests of the Parliament - for example, on flexibility. The difference between commitments and payments in the European Council conclusions “makes flexibility indispensable to a final agreement for the MFF”, he stated.
Addressing the Irish Presidency, the leader of the S&D Group, Hannes Swoboda (Austria), said: “We are deeply disappointed at the way the discussions have taken place. You don't budge to reach a compromise. You must budge - otherwise there will be no agreement on the basis of what you are currently proposing.” The negotiations are not progressing, according to Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE, Belgium), with “the Council ignoring the reasonable requests of the Parliament” on more flexibility and the revision clause. “We do not accept that the next European Parliament might have nothing to say on the budget for seven years. That is what you are currently trying to peddle us”, Verhofstadt said.
Gabriele Zimmer (GUE/NGL, Germany) spoke to the member states. “What money are you going to finance the proposals on the fight against youth unemployment with? You are forcing the European Parliament to create a union of deficits - but this is against the treaties”, she said. (LC with MB/transl.fl)