During a debate in Brussels on Wednesday 30 November, the European Parliament said that it was not satisfied with the agreement taking shape at the Council of the EU on the mid-term revision of the multi-annual financial framework (MFF) of the EU for 2014-2020 (see EUROPE 11669). It wishes to start talks with the Slovak Presidency of the Council to improve the agreement on this dossier, which is currently being finalised at the Council.
On behalf of the Slovak Presidency of the Council, Ivan Korčok, the Secretary of State to the Slovak Foreign Ministry, said that the agreement of the Council (without Italy on board for the time being) was satisfactory. In particular, he said that 85% of the additional funding for 2017-2020 (migration, growth and jobs) was fresh money (85% of €6.01 billion). Budgetary flexibility has also been increased, he stressed.
Korčok took exception to Parliament's criticism, which said that the agreement (on the additional funds and flexibility) was essentially hot air. "They can't say it's not fresh money, even if we are still within the ceilings of the MFF", he stressed. He observed that the MEPs wanted the debate on the MFF to continue. "Quite frankly, however, I have to tell you that there is little room for any additional changes to the agreement" at the Council, he warned, calling on MEPs to show some realism. He added that he can see no reason not to schedule a further meeting at political level before the Council sends an official request to consult Parliament.
No new reserve to manage crises in the EU
Kristalina Georgieva, the outgoing Commissioner for the Budget, called upon the Council and Parliament to agree by the end of the year on the revision of the MFF. For some actions, additional funds will indeed be needed in 2017, but they will also be needed in 2018 and 2019. She referred to the examples of the European bodyguard and coastguard agency and funding to promote youth employment (€1.2 billion for 2017 to 2020 earmarked in the Council agreement).
The Commissioner expressed regrets that the Council had rejected her idea of creating a new reserve to manage crises within the EU.
The EP not in a position to give its agreement
The rapporteur on the mid-term revision of the MFF, Jan Olbrycht (EPP, Poland) said that the agreement at the Council was not yet ripe, as Italy has not lifted its reservation. The member state may do so following the referendum of 4 December on constitutional reform. Olbrycht said that Parliament was not in a position to give its agreement to the package. In particular, he called for greater budgetary flexibility. We need to start negotiations so that Parliament can give its blessing, Olbrycht said. Parliament may either reject or approve the Council agreement.
In the view of Isabelle Thomas (S&D, France), the other rapporteur on the MFF, the agreement reached at the Council is not yet good enough, particularly on the initiative to tackle youth unemployment. "We would risk losing everything we have obtained in the 2017 budget if we agreed to the Council's proposal on the revision of the MFF", Thomas said.
Gérard Deprez (ALDE, Belgium) said that the additional funds in heading 1a (growth) of the MFF were not enough. He feels that it is still possible to do a bit better in terms of budgetary flexibility. Flexibility does not resolve everything, said Ernest Maragall (Greens/EFA, Spain). He criticised the countries of the EU for effectively saying no to Europe by making this very minimal agreement. He regretted the fact that the Council had not increased the ceilings of the MFF. The envelope for the Erasmus+ programme needs to be increased further, stressed the chair of Parliament's budget committee, Jean Arthuis (ALDE, France). (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)