Brussels, 03/07/2013 (Agence Europe) - In Strasbourg on Wednesday 3 July, the European Parliament (EP) welcomed the inter-institutional political agreement reached on 27 June 2013 on the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the period 2014-2020 (see EUROPE 10876). This agreement is “the best possible result under the current circumstances”, said its president, Germany's Martin Schulz.
In its adoption of a resolution by the EPP, S&D and ADLE Groups, the EP takes the view that this agreement has allowed several provisions to be enshrined in order to make the new financial framework operational, coherent, transparent and better adapted to the needs of the citizens of the European Union (MFF revision, flexibility, own resources, unity and budget transparency). T he amendments of the Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL Groups rejecting the political agreement on the MFF were voted down at the plenary vote.
The EP is prepared to put the MFF regulation and the new inter-institutional agreement to the vote “in the early autumn, as soon as the necessary technical and legal conditions for the finalisation of the relevant texts are fulfilled”. In order to give its consent, it requires the support of a majority of its members.
Budget 2013. The EP points out, however, that “the consent vote on the MAFF regulation cannot be granted unless there is an absolute guarantee that the outstanding payment claims for 2013 will be covered in full”. It expects the Ecofin Council of Tuesday 9 July to make a decision on the draft amending budget 2/2013 for the amount of €7.3 billion. It insists that the Council stick to its political commitment to adopt without delay the amending budget to avoid any shortfall in payment appropriations that could lead to a structural deficit in the EU budget at the end of 2013. “The Parliament will not give its consent to the MFF regulation or adopt the Budget 2014 until this new amending budget, covering the remaining deficit as identified by the Commission, has been adopted by the Council”, the European institution stipulates.
Global volume. The EP, which is aware of the budgetary constraints the member states are under, nonetheless takes the view that the total volume of the next MFF, as decided by the European Council, “falls short of EU political goals and the need to ensure the successful implementation of the EUROPE 2020 strategy”. According to MEPs, the level of resources might not be sufficient to give the European Union the necessary means to recover from the current crisis. They regret the fact that the member states continue to underestimate the role of the EU budget in, and its contribution to, strengthening economic governance and fiscal coordination across the EU and fear, moreover, that such low MFF ceilings will significantly reduce any room for manoeuvre for the Parliament in the annual budgetary procedures.
Compulsory review. The EP stresses the importance of a compulsory review and subsequent revision of the next MFF by the end of 2016, in order to allow the next Commission and Parliament to reassess the EU's political priorities, to adapt the MFF to new challenges and needs and take full account of the latest macroeconomic projections. It recommends that the compulsory review to be conducted by the Commission of both the expenditure and revenue sides of the EU budget be accompanied by legislative proposals for a revision of the MAFF regulation, as stated in the Commission declaration. The EP intends to make this compulsory review a key demand in the investiture of the new Commission President.
Flexibility. The EP reiterates the crucial importance of the enhanced flexibility in the MFF 2014-2020 with a view to making full use of the respective MFF ceilings for commitments (€960 billion) and payments (€908.4 billion). It welcomes, therefore, the Council's approval of two key proposals put forward by the Parliament, namely the creation of a Global Margin in Payments and a Global Margin in Commitments, “which will allow the automatic carry-over of unused appropriations from one financial year to the next”. However, it views as regrettable the limitations imposed by the Council (in terms of time or amount), which may prevent the full use of these instruments. It considers that improving these mechanisms should be an integral part of the post-electoral revision of the MAFF to be proposed by the Commission. The MEPs stress that the new flexibility rules on commitments should lead, in the course of the MFF 2014-2020, to additional appropriations for programmes linked to growth and employment, and in particular the Youth Employment Initiative, in order to ensure continuous funding and maximise the efficient use of the agreed ceilings.
Youth employment. The EP welcomes the 2014-2015 frontloading of appropriations for the Youth Employment Initiative and insists that extra appropriations will be needed as of 2016 to ensure the sustainability and effectiveness of this programme. Funding for Horizon 2020, Erasmus and COSME will also be frontloaded in 2014-15 in order to decrease the funding gap between the relevant appropriations in the 2013 and 2014 budgets, and insists on further funding for the digital agenda.
The EP welcomes the additional increase of up to €1 billion for the food distribution scheme for those member states wishing to use it to assist the most deprived persons in the EU, taking the overall budget for the scheme to €3.5 billion.
Own resources. The EP regrets that the Council has not been able to make any progress on the reform of the own-resources system on the basis of the legislative proposals put forward by the Commission, and emphasises that the EU budget should be financed by genuine own resources. The EP states its commitment to a reform that reduces the share of GNI-based contributions to the EU budget to a maximum of 40%.
The European Parliament considers that any possible “eurozone budget” that may be envisaged in the future should be either integrated into, or annexed to, the EU budget and “views as deeply regrettable the procedure that led to this agreement on the MFF 2014-2020, which in reality has had the effect of depriving Parliament of its true budgetary powers as provided for in the TFEU”. (LC/transl.fl)