At the General Affairs Council in Brussels on Tuesday 20 September, a number of countries that are net contributors to the EU budget, mainly the Scandinavian countries, criticised the proposals to increase the flexibility of the multi-annual financial framework (MFF) of the EU for 2014-2020.
In general, several countries supported the Commission's proposals on the mid-term revision of the 2014-2020 MFF, which were presented on 14 September.
Flexibility – a touchy subject. In the framework of the mid-term revision of the MFF, the Commission has proposed: - doubling the level of the flexibility instrument and the emergency aid reserves; - removing the limits on the global commitments margin and global payments margin, so as to allow full use to be made of the current headings of the MFF; - a new EU crisis reserve; - the creation of a 'flexibility reserve' for external instruments; - the creation of trust funds for internal policies as well.
The Commission said on Tuesday that its proposals would make it possible to comply with the current headings of the MFF, a requirement which was underscored by the so-called 'net contributor' countries, such as Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and France.
Some of these countries, chiefly the Scandinavian ones, stressed that the excessive flexibility proposed could lead to an increase in the contributions of the member states, which they feel should be avoided at all costs. Germany stressed that the countries could agree on priorities (growth, migration, jobs for young people), but that there was no consensus on the elements which are not priority. Germany's representation anticipates extremely tough discussions and warned that areas would need to be found in which the EU could make savings.
Sweden stressed the need for restraint in expenditure and opposed plans to use de-commitments to pay for certain new flexibility instruments. Flexibility comes at a cost, said Denmark, which expressed concerns that the countries' contributions to the budget could rise. Belgium also predicted that increasing flexibility would lead to a mobilisation of funds with an impact on the national public finances. "We will be vigilant in terms of neutrality on the national public finances", said Belgium. Finland feels that the EU budget should not increase at the moment and France argued that the balances of the MFF should be respected, which will require tweaks to the flexibility and effectiveness of European spending. "All of this must be done in respect of the agreed limits, without circumnavigating them, because we have public finance constraints", the French minister said.
Hands off the traditional major policies. Poland, which feels that the proposals are an excellent basis for discussions, called for the flexibility instruments to be increased beyond the ceilings of the MFF (which, incidentally, is what the Commission is proposing). This call was shared by Lithuania, Romania and Hungary.
Spain congratulated the Commission on its ambitious proposals, but added that these should be the subject of a detailed technical examination, for instance within the 'Friends of the Presidency' group (which will meet for the first time on Friday 23 September). However, Spain reiterated three principles: - the use of the innovative financial instruments must not come at the expense of EU aid; - the revision must not lead to any changes to the basic balances and a stealth revision of certain policies; - the amounts allocated to the member states must not be reduced.
Ireland said that the new needs should not be paid for at the expense of other areas that add value, such as the agri-food sector. It called for adequate funding for the common agriculture policy (CAP). Lithuania also defended the value added by the CAP, and Austria described the policy as strategic.
Hungary and Croatia defended the role of the cohesion policy. Romania said that the CAP and the cohesion policy should maintain their strong roles and called for a stable and predictable MFF. Romania rejected any in-depth revision of the MFF, which it feared would be harmful to the traditional policies.
Greece, which feels that the proposals are a step in the right direction, argued that Europe should do more in the social field and that the human factor and actions to reduce the unemployment rate must not be forgotten.
The Commission and the Slovak Presidency said they hoped that the proposals on the revision of the MFF will be adopted by the end of 2016, at the same time as the EU budget for 2017. The Presidency of the Council is planning a discussion on the MFF at all forthcoming General Affairs Councils (October, November and December). "The first in-depth discussion will take place in October", the Slovak Presidency of the Council has announced. A discussion on the organisation of the work on the MFF will also be held within Coreper (Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States to the EU) on Wednesday 21 September. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)