According to the Commission’s calculations, the next European budget should be 1.2% of member states’ GNP in an effort to maintain current policies and respond to emerging challenges, explained the Commissioner for Regional Policy, Corina Crețu, on Wednesday 15 November at the end of the General Affairs Council on cohesion policy.
The Commissioner referred to the question of post-2020 cohesion policy and stated, “The current budget is 1% of the EU 28’s GNP. Therefore, according to our calculations, in an effort to preserve the most important policies, such as agricultural and cohesion policies, as well as respond to new challenges, such as defence and immigration, we need a budget of 1.2% of the member states’ GNP”. In her address to the press and reference to post-2020 cohesion policy, she explained that that was what they were wishing for.
During the session, several delegations alluded to the extremely difficult question of the budget shortfall, which will be created when the United Kingdom leaves in spring 2019. Some delegations, such as Germany and Denmark, have advocated budget cuts.
Commissioner Cretu said that she was aware of the problem but that the ball is in the court of the member states, “We will see what the member states prefer: proceeding to cuts or to partially make good the budget shortfall?” The Commissioner would like to maintain cohesion policy at its current level, as advocated by members of the Cohesion Alliance (see EUROPE 11879).
Nonetheless, within the Commission, some documents demonstrate that internal services that spend the EU budget, such as the directorate general for regional policy (DG REGIO), are anticipating budget cuts that go as far as 30% (see EUROPE 11901). In a reply to EUROPE, the Commissioner explained, “I know there are documents circulating and certain scenarios but I am not going to comment on them”.
Ex ante conditionalities. The question of extending the ex ante conditionalities – granting structural funds on the basis of prior respect for certain values (rule of law) or rules (Stability Pact), was discussed by many European delegations. According to the information we have received, Germany, Italy, Sweden, France, the Netherlands and Belgium are in favour of the idea of creating a link between the payment of structural and investment funds and respect for the rule of law –this proposal is also regularly mooted at the Commission (see EUROPE 11736).
According to one diplomatic source, speaking on behalf of the Visegrad Group of countries, which will soon make known in its position on the question, Hungary and Poland have said they supported incentive rather than punitive measures.
In response to EUROPE, Ms Crețu again expressed her misgivings about this possibility (see EUROPE 11782 and 11904). If such a mechanism is to be envisaged it should only target cohesion policy and be applied horizontally. The Commissioner also repeated on this occasion that she would prefer an incentive rather than punitive approach.
Ms Crețu also explained that the rule of law was a very difficult parameter to measure. Overall, she is concerned by excessive ex ante conditionality that would provoke greater bureaucracy and further complicate cohesion policy.
“Omnibus” regulation. In the morning, the Estonian Presidency of the Council of the European Union drew up a balance sheet of the inter-institutional negotiations currently being pursued on the “omnibus” regulation and structural and investment funds (ESI funds).
The Commissioner called on the co-legislators to reach an agreement before the end of 2017. Ms Cretu has expressed her concern about the considerable number of amendments submitted by the Parliament and Council and is afraid that the Commission’s goal to achieve simplification could be transformed into further complication of the regulation on common provisions (Regulation 1303/2013).
Simplification of cohesion policy. Ministers adopted, without debate, the conclusions on the synergies and simplification of cohesion policy for the post-2020 period, whose main guidelines have been outlined by EUROPE (see EUROPE 11904). The debate on this question will become more intense under the next Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU (see EUROPE 11901).
For further information: http://bit.ly/2zEinnV (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)