It was a rare thing at the Council to see almost all the member states at the Competitiveness Council on Friday 28 September unanimously speak against the proposal to introduce a dual legal basis as part of the specific programme for implementing the Horizon Europe research and innovation framework programme.
As pointed out by the Commissioner for Research, Carlos Moedas, in his introduction, the decision to expand the legal basis to article 173 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in addition to article 182 of the TFEU, was in an effort to take innovation into better account, particularly with the setting up of the European Innovation Council (EIC). This modification could result in the inclusion of the European Parliament in the decision-making process, although up until now, it has only been consulted. The Council's legal services thought that this proposal was “inappropriate".
At a technical level, the majority of member states spoke in favour of the Council's opinion. The delegations are now unanimous at a political level in supporting it. There was less consensus, however, on the question of whether they should begin an inter-institutional dialogue as soon as possible with the European Parliament or wait for the contents to be well-established in order to determine the legal basis. Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland and Slovakia appeared to be in favour of the first option. France, Portugal, Luxembourg, Finland, Estonia and even Romania appeared to be opposed to it.
In reply to the contributions made, Commissioner Moedas warned the member states about the risk of prematurely launching an inter-institutional dialogue, which could block the negotiations.
Differences
The Austrian Presidency of the Council represented by the Minister for Research, Heinz Faßmann, also attempted to sound out the member states on two other major themes: the question of arbitration between promoting excellence and reabsorbing innovation disparities in Europe and the structure of the second section of Horizon Europe focusing on “global issues and industrial competitiveness”. On the first question, a geographical division appeared: the member states from northern and western Europe advocated excellence and were opposed by those in the south and east, which defended a more equal treatment between member states by the future framework programme. Therefore, certain member states preferred “widening participation” instead of “sharing excellence” in order to strengthen the European research area, such as Croatia. Italy proposed combining the two concepts. Several member states called for an increase in the specific budget, whilst some of them wanted to increase the envelope from 2% to 5%, such as Estonia or even 20%, as called for by Hungary.
Certain member states, such as the Netherlands, considered, on the contrary, that the European Funds for Structural Investment (EFSI) and not Horizon Europe should play this support role for the member states that are less well off. They also pointed out that they needed to be pragmatic with regard to international competition (China, India, the US) and that investment should as a priority be delivered by the member states themselves.
On the second question, the majority of member states welcomed the European Commission proposal to create a pillar for responding to major global challenges. The ministers, however, had a number of questions regarding the five 'Clusters' planned by the Commission, which they said were too “vast”. Many of the delegations therefore called for climate research to be separated from research on mobility, a separation they also requested for the inclusive society and security. In this connection, several delegations expressed a wish for budgetary signposting to be more precise. The Commissioner explained that obtaining greater precision would be done to the disadvantage of flexibility, something a lot of member states were calling for.
With the European Parliament
During dinner, ministers were able to have informal discussions with the two EP rapporteurs, Christian Ehler (EPP, Germany), on the specific implementation programme, and Dan Nica (S&D, Romania), on the framework programme. Discussions focused on “the contents” rather than the “form”, Mr Moedas explained to EUROPE.
The Austrian Presidency is hoping to adopt a general approach on the Horizon Europe framework programme during the next Competitiveness Council on 29 and 30 November next. One source informed us that an agreement on the specific programme was likely. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)