There is still great uncertainty about the position that the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) will adopt on Wednesday 4 March when it votes on the Lalucq draft report on the socio-economic policies that Member States should pursue in 2020 as part of the ‘European Semester’ budget process.
A coordinators’ meeting amongst the main political groups was to take place on the evening of Tuesday 3 March, which some experts described as “the last chance”. However, within the S&D and EPP groups, there was open pessimism as we went to press.
But time is running out: a vote is needed between now and the plenary session starting Monday 9 March. Otherwise, Parliament will not be in a position to adopt its position on the issue before the Spring European Council gives its orientations at the end of the month.
Overall, despite several internal meetings devoted to the search for compromises, positions do not seem to have changed much since mid-February, when a debate showed the left/right divide (see EUROPE 12427/12). None of the main political groups seems ready to give up their red lines and the hope of rapporteur Aurore Lalucq (S&D, France) to rally the Renew Europe group to her cause to get around the EPP group’s obstacle has not been fulfilled.
On Wednesday, MEPs could be asked to vote on compromise proposals supported by the S&D, Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL groups on the one hand, and the EPP and Renew Europe groups on the other, with the former accusing the latter of defending a position on socio-economic issues that calls into question the position expressed by Parliament at the inauguration of the von der Leyen Commission.
According to a comparative table of the main stumbling blocks consulted by EUROPE, the left in Parliament advocates revising the economic governance framework through greater flexibility in European budgetary rules to facilitate investment in the transition to a low-carbon economy. On the right, it is felt that the Stability and Growth Pact is sufficiently flexible and that introducing a golden rule for ‘green’ investments would encourage budget excesses.
While the S&D, Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL groups support the integration of the UN sustainable development goals and the European pillar of social rights into the ‘European Semester’, the EPP and Renew Europe groups are reportedly only willing to ensure that the ‘European Semester’ takes into account certain social and environmental issues. “We don’t want a Christmas tree”, one parliamentary source told EUROPE.
The issue of deepening Economic and Monetary Union is also divisive. The European right is opposed to “meaningful” measures advocated by the left that would result in a fiscal capacity for the euro area with a stabilising function. Nor does it take a positive view of the proposal for a European unemployment insurance scheme, even though it is included in the Commission’s work programme. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)