The European Parliament was quite divided on the quality of the European Council’s agreement on a €750 billion, EU post-Covid-19 Economic Recovery Plan and the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) on Thursday 23 July in Brussels.
On Thursday, Parliament adopted (682 votes, 465 votes against, 150 in favour and 67 abstentions) a resolution by the EPP, S&D, Renew Europe, Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL groups analysing the conclusions of the European Council of 17-21 July 2020 (see voting list: https://bit.ly/3jz06N6 ). It acknowledges that the creation of the recovery instrument represents a historic step forward for the Union, but “nevertheless contests the political agreement on the 2021-2027 MFF in its current form”.
It expresses its readiness to enter immediately into constructive negotiations with the EU Council with a view to improving the proposal (see EUROPE 12533/1).
“We finally have solidarity”, said Manfred Weber (EPP, Germany). But he qualified his words: “I am satisfied with the existence of this agreement, but I am not satisfied with the agreement itself”.
Dacian Cioloș (Renew Europe, Romanian) welcomed the fact that in a short period of time, Europe has shown “unprecedented solidarity by setting up a joint loan to be repaid together” in response to the crisis.
Iratxe García (S&D, Spain) welcomed the agreement on joint debt issuance. However, she criticised the unanimous decision-making process for the management of these Eurobonds.
Martin Schirdewan (GUE/NGL, Germany) was not satisfied with the agreement reached and denounced national egoism.
The essential element of the Commission proposal remains. “For the first time, the EU will finance massive investments through a joint loan”, welcomed Philippe Lamberts (Greens/EFA, Belgium).
No to cuts in future policies. “This bitter pill, on the MFF, we are not ready to swallow it”, Mr Weber warned.
Mr Lamberts considered that the Commission’s proposals on the Recovery Plan came away “mutilated” from the negotiations. The European budget has been reduced, especially in its dimensions related to the European Green Deal, he regretted.
“We don’t want these cuts”, said Ms García.
For there to be an agreement, we need an MFF with sufficient means to fund our policies for the future, said Mr Cioloș.
Governance. “Europe is not a cash drawer for the benefit of national budgets. The proposal on the table leads to a renationalisation of European finances and the European budget. 90% of this €750 billion will go directly to the Member States’ budgets, and as yet nobody knows what it will be used for”, Mr Weber criticised. Member States should have agreed, according to the EPP leader, on European projects to be funded, such as a transnational 5G network or a real hydrogen plan. He asked the Presidents of the European Council and the Commission to present a list of six or seven innovative European industrial projects under the Recovery Plan.
Mr Cioloș also noted that the European Council wants to use European money to fund more national programmes, to the detriment of Community programmes: “This European debt must finance real European projects, the European Parliament must ensure this in an interinstitutional agreement on the implementation of these recovery programmes”.
Respect for the rule of law. “The package must contain strong guarantees on the ability to link European funds to respect for the rule of law”, stressed Mr Cioloș. “We need a mechanism with clear rules, not against Hungary, Poland or any other Member State, but to ensure that European money no longer finances politicians in power who turn their backs on our fundamental values every day”, he said.
More clarity is needed on the rule of law mechanism and a clear plan on how to implement the principle of ‘no money without respect for European rules and mechanisms’, Mr Weber said.
The mechanism adopted remains unclear, according to Mr Lamberts, and there is no guarantee that it will be functional.
Mr Schirdewan regretted the lack of agreement on a ‘rule of law’ mechanism. Rights and freedoms “are not goods that can be traded for billions”, he said.
“Not a single euro for those governments that do not fully respect the rule of law!” warned Ms García.
Own resources. Mr Cioloș considered that it would be “unreasonable to borrow such a sum without knowing how to repay it”. He wants a precise timetable on these new own resources before starting repayment.
For Mr Lamberts, the question of the repayment of the loan comes up. “Member States will have to give the EU the right to levy taxes”, he said, particularly on multinational companies and polluting activities.
“For Europe’s misers, the EU is nothing more than a money pump that its countries are still feeding too much”, said Mr Lamberts. He also criticised the “pseudo-democrats” that are the Hungarian and Polish leaders. For the leader of the Greens/EFA group, respect for the rule of law “is the apt compensation for solidarity”.
For the European Parliament Budgets Committee’s provisional analysis of the European Council agreement: https://bit.ly/2WSasOu (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)