On Tuesday 15 May, the members of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) criticised the Commission's lack of ambition over the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2027, stressing that the MFF was not an accounting exercise, but a political act (see EUROPE 12013). They lamented the announced cuts in funding proposed in the fields of agriculture and the cohesion policy.
At a conference analysing the Commission's proposals on the forthcoming MFF, Stefano Palmieri, chair of the Economic and Monetary Union, Economic and Social Cohesion (ECO) section of the EESC, said that the section would adopt an opinion on the 2021-2027 MFF at September's plenary. The rapporteur will be Javier Doz Orrit.
The European budget cannot continue to represent less than 1% of the gross national income (GNI) of the EU, Palmieri argued. The EESC supports the European Parliament's proposals to increase this to 1.3% of GNI (see EUROPE 11981).
Amongst other things, Palmieri called for more public investments with a social objective. He also criticised the proposal to cut agricultural expenditure by 5% as in real terms, this would represent a cut of 13%. Finally, he expressed doubts as to the effectiveness of the new macro-economic stabilisation tool in the framework of Economic and Monetary Union. “€32 billion is not a lot, he said”, calling in general for a more in-depth reform of the EU budget.
Expressing fears of a low turnout in the European elections of May 2019, Luca Jahier, the President of the EESC, called for the EU institutions to send out a message of responsibility to the citizens, whilst criticising the lack of ambition in the Commission's proposals.
He considers that there are two challenges to be met: 1) taking account of the impact of Brexit: it will not be easy to replace the €70 billion of the UK's net contribution to the EU budget, with the agreement on the British withdrawal from the EU yet to be finalised (see EUROPE 12019). “We do not know whether the country will continue to contribute, or at what level”, he stressed, 2) reinforcing security, defence and protection of the borders: there are new programmes that must be paid for.
The EESC President also criticised the budget cuts proposed for the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) and cohesion. “We should not have to choose between old and new policies”, he said, adding: “we cannot accept such drastic cuts to the CAP and cohesion. And we oppose any reduction to the budget of the European Social Fund”.
Welcoming the Commission's proposals on creating new own resources, Jahier described as “fairly narrow” the Commission's interpretation of creating a link between granting European funding and respect for the rule of law, in other words protecting the financial interests of the EU. The EESC takes the view that any support via EU funds should be subject to greater conditionality (adherence to Community rules and decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU).
Stefan Lehner, Director of the Commission's budget services, started by acknowledging that the proposal would have been different without Brexit. He explained the cuts to the two major traditional policies as aiming to free up money for new priority areas. He also promised an in-depth reform of the CAP in the legislative proposals anticipated at the end of May.
MEP Isabelle Thomas (S&D, France), rapporteur on the next MFF, accused the Commission of dressing up the figures. “It turns out that the MFF upper limits fall to 1.06% of GDP, with reductions of 16% for the CAP and 10% for cohesion”, she said. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)