On Wednesday 30 August, MEPs on the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgets took the view that the European Commission’s proposal on the mid-term review of the EU’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 was insufficient to meet the current challenges (war in Ukraine, migration, strategic autonomy).
The draft ‘interim report’ by Jan Olbrycht (EPP, Polish) and Margarida Marques (S&D, Portuguese) on the mid-term review of the MFF (2021-2027) suggests an increase of €10 billion, compared to what the Commission is proposing (€75 billion), in the amount of new money, in particular address the effects of the war.
Plenary vote in October. The draft report is due to be adopted by Parliament’s Committee on Budgets on 20 September, before a plenary vote on the dossier at the first October plenary session. Parliament would like the revision to come into force before January 2024 in order to feed into next year’s annual budget.
José Manuel Fernandes (EPP, Portuguese), speaking on behalf of Mr Olbrycht, pointed out that the draft report “sets the level of ambition at 10 billion euros above the Commission’s proposal”.
The Commission’s proposal for the revised MFF provides €65.8 billion in new money, “but this is not enough” in the eyes of the rapporteurs, “especially if we consider that inflation could reduce the real value of the MFF by €74 billion over the seven-year period”, said Mr Fernandes.
This proposal (an additional €10 billion) is balanced, according to Ms Marques, who defended the maintenance of the appropriations devoted to cohesion policy.
Ukraine. The ‘Ukraine reserve’ will not exceed €50 billion. Of this amount, 17 billion would be financed by new money, with the remainder in the form of loans. The draft report welcomes the proposed solution and calls for Parliament, as one of the two arms of the budgetary authority, to play a full role in the process (see other news).
Migration. In addition, the Commission’s proposal includes a ‘migration and external challenges’ strand (an additional €15 billion). The rapporteurs believe that, in view of the additional demands placed on the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the financial support instrument for border management and visa policy, and the decentralised agencies, their funding should be increased by €1 billion in current prices compared to the Commission’s proposal.
Strategic autonomy. MEPs would have preferred the creation of a new European sovereignty fund, rather than a €10 billion ‘Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform’ (STEP), as finally proposed by the Commission. The draft report provides for a €3 billion increase in the budget for STEP.
“We wanted a strong fiscal capacity, which is not what STEP represents”, said Rasmus Andresen (Greens/EFA, German). Dimítrios Papadimoúlis (The Left, Greek) also felt that the amounts earmarked by STEP were insufficient. Valérie Hayer (Renew Europe, French) also criticised the STEP instrument’s lack of ambition.
Ms Hayer said that her group would be tabling amendments to increase the appropriations earmarked for defence in view of the additional production requirements.
Rasmus Andresen said he would table amendments in favour of a more substantial increase in humanitarian aid (an additional €1 billion, according to the draft report).
Several MEPs noted that the Council of the EU was very reticent about this mid-term review, with the exception of support for Ukraine.
The European Commission insisted in particular on the need for a “targeted” approach and to “focus on what is essential”. The STEP instrument has been proposed because Europe needs to act quickly, the institution said. “Good cooperation should enable us to reach an agreement quickly”, concluded the Commission.
Link to the draft report: https://aeur.eu/f/8du (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)