Brussels, 19/11/2013 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament finally approved (by 537 votes to 126, with 19 abstentions) the regulation on the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the 2014-2020 period, comprising €960 billion in commitment appropriations and €908 billion in payment appropriations (see EUROPE 10876). The Council is due to formally approve the MFF on 2 December.
Many MEPs regretted the lack of ambition contained in this compromise on some points, particularly with regard to the total budget provided. The 2014-2020 MFF will have €40 billion less than the current MFF (2007-2013). The Greens/EFA voted against the text, as did the GUE/NGL.
In July, the European Parliament agreed to the compromise reached on the 2014-2020 MFF but introduced three conditions for its final approval. These conditions have now been met. Additional payments (€3.9 billion, after a previous envelope of €7.3 billion) needed for implementing a balanced 2013 budget have been secured, the regulations defining the contents of Community policies funded by the budget no longer provoke any major differences and the launch of the EU budget resources reform procedure will be ensured over the next few days.
Jean-Luc Dehaene (ALDE, Belgium), the rapporteur, stated that the EP had obtained important guarantees: a revision clause that avoids the next Parliament's hands being tied, additional flexibility, comprehensive application of co-decision, continuation of the debate on the EU's own resources (setting up a high-level workgroup that is expected to “find solutions”). The rapporteur said that the EP had got what it wanted. The EP is, however, disappointed: the European budget was supposed to be an investment budget that develops to counterbalance the cuts made but, unfortunately, this goal had not been achieved because the MFF has been reduced compared to the current MFF (2007-2013), explained Dehaene. He regretted that cohesion policy and agriculture continue to dominate this budget and pointed out that “we missed the boat when it came to achieving a rebalance in certain areas”. Dehaene thought that the opportunities provided by the Lisbon Treaty had not been used to the full, “due to the attitude displayed by the European Council”. An own initiative report will be drafted in an effort to learn the lessons from the way in which these negotiations were conducted. Dehaene regretted that the EP had been weakened and highlighted the fact that the Council had acted in national interests, “to the disadvantage of the European interest”. He recommended that in the long run they get rid of the required unanimity vote on MFF and stressed that “we need our own European resources”.
The Lithuanian Presidency intends to organise, on the 18th and 19th of December at the latest, an initial meeting of the high-level group on own resources, said Lithuanian Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs Vytautas Leskevicius, speaking on behalf of the Council.
Janusz Lewandowski, Commissioner for the Budget said: “I really acknowledge the intelligent, pragmatic and finally successful approach of Parliament in the way it worked to improve the architecture of the financial framework for seven year periods” for the MFF. He also regretted that “we have €40 billion less for the future than we have now. This has never happened before in the history of the European Union”. Fortunately, according to the commissioner, the EP has managed to obtain instruments that will increase the flexibility of the budget if necessary (visibility instrument and margins). The commissioner also believes that there are clear innovations in the budget (Youth Initiative, Connecting Europe Facility, Erasmus, research etc.) and there is therefore a “decent modernisation of the budget”.
Alain Lamassoure (EPP, France), the chairman of the EP's budgets committee, said that this budgetary framework “does not settle anything. It was neither the best possible outcome nor the worst but the only one possible. It will not hold together for seven years, not even three”. According to Lamassoure, this framework will not help to ensure basic solidarity among EU countries. It will be even more difficult to fund the new competencies provided to the EU by the Lisbon Treaty. This framework “does not leave any room for manoeuvre for unexpected developments”. This is why the European Parliament believes it is very important to reform the way in which the budget is funded and why a high-level group on the reform of the EU's own resources should be set up. MLamassoure concluded: “Without any budgetary independence, the EU is condemned to slowly suffocate to death”.
Göran Färm (S&D, Sweden) pointed out that the EP had rejected the European Council's agreement last February. He asserted that “we were unable to change the budgetary ceilings but we were able to introduce a number of improvements, particularly on flexibility to use money that has not been spent”. There is also more funding for tackling youth unemployment and research. In a press release, the leader of the S&D Group, Hannes Swoboda, stated that “it is the best compromise we could get in these times of fiscal tightening across Europe”. The European Parliament, which will be elected next year, will have the chance in 2016 to reopen the discussions to adapt to the post-crisis needs of Europe. The S&D Group points out that it is “very unhappy” on the subject of macro-conditionality.
Jan Mulder (ALDE, Netherlands) called for a five-year MFF and was pessimistic about the possibility of the next EP's “shifting the focus on certain points” during the mid-term review, “given that unanimity will still be required”. He also regretted the very slim margins that remain and the absence of funding in the event of health crises affecting livestock.
You are all ridiculous!
Speaking on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group, Daniel Cohn-Bendit exclaimed that “you are all against this multiannual budget but you are all going to vote for it. You are all ridiculous!” He added that, “with the Lisbon Treaty, we had the chance of putting a stop to the nationalisation of the European budget. You didn't take this chance. You are masochists. I don't know what sadistic power the Commission and Council have but sadomasochism is indeed the current prevailing culture at the European Parliament”. The leader of the Greens said that President Schulz had not negotiated very well and had “led us into a brick wall”. Cohn-Bendit concluded that “we are indeed practising austerity and driving citizens into a brick wall”.
Martin Callanan (ECR, United Kingdom) stated that an agreement had been reached that was a lot like the one negotiated by EU leaders last February. He said that this was a step in the right direction because it demonstrated that costs could be cut in the EU and that taxpayers' money could be used better. Before appealing for a better Europe, not more Europe, he warned that there would be no own resources.
Jürgen Klute (GUE/NGL, Germany) said that the result was unacceptable and that the impact of the cuts was not yet known. He was particularly critical of the spending cuts to structural funds. (LC/transl.fl)