On the eve of a new meeting of interinstitutional negotiations (trilogue) on the Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova, Siegfried Mureșan (EPP, Romanian), co-rapporteur on this text with Sven Mikser (S&D, Estonian) for the European Parliament, gave Agence Europe an update on the discussions. The Chair of the European Parliament Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Association Committee also spoke about Russian disinformation in Moldova and the country’s EU accession process. (Interview by Camille-Cerise Gessant)
Agence Europe - This Wednesday evening, there will be a new trilogue on the Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova. What can we expect (see EUROPE 13580/18)?
Siegfried Mureșan - All three institutions (European Commission, Council of the EU and European Parliament) are committed to finalising negotiations on that day because we have to make support available for Moldova, and fast If we conclude the negotiations on 19 February, we can give the final vote in Parliament’s plenary session at the beginning of March.
The next step would be for Moldova to present to the Commission a so-called growth plan, because this €1.8 billion European support is money for investments in combination with reforms under clear conditions. The Republic of Moldova needs to present a growth plan, and the Commission to adopt it. Only after the Commission assesses that the growth plan complies with European legislation can the pre-financing be paid out and money start flowing.
We know that the Commission and the Moldovan government are in the final stages of the negotiations. We believe that the growth plan can be adopted in April if legislation enters into force in March, and so that the pre-financing is paid at the beginning of May at the latest.
Is it important to do this before the general elections (scheduled for the autumn)?
It’s essential to do it before the legislative elections, but also to do it not the day before elections, but longer before so that money can produce results on the ground.
Russia will try to destabilise the country again before the parliamentary elections. This is why it’s essential that European support comes in a visible manner before the elections. And this is why beginning of May is our objective for the pre-financing to flow.
With regard to the Facility, in your report you asked that pre-financing not be 7%, as proposed by the Commission, but 20%, and that non-repayable subsidies not be 16%, but 23.5% (see EUROPE 13542/16). Where are you in the negotiations?
The European Commission presented this growth plan in October last year (see EUROPE 13501/17). The Council adopted its position very fast at the end of 2024 (see EUROPE 13547/27) and we, as a Parliament, adopted our position at the end of January (see EUROPE 13569/18).
We could take into account recent developments. We saw Russian interference in the election campaign (presidential and referendum) (see EUROPE 13508/1), the current energy crisis and Russia’s attempt to blackmail the country with energy. We could take this into account. This is why our position is more ambitious.
We came to the conclusion that the pre-financing is the best tool to support the country. This is why Sven Mikser and myself, proposed that we increase the pre-financing from 7% to 20%. That means that the money available to Moldova immediately would go from €125 million to €360 million. That’s a significant increase for the country. It doesn’t cost us a penny more because it is an amount that we would pay anyways over the course of the three years, but we would just pay it faster.
I am confident that we will have an increase from 7%, that it will be close to 20%, close to the position of the Parliament. We will insist for the 20%, and I do not exclude that this will be the end result.
And for the non repayable funds?
The European Commission proposes for this Facility 16% grants and 84% loans. We are proposing to increase the grants component and to reduce the burden on Moldova in the long term, because grants is money that Moldova doesn’t have to pay back.
We have proposed a technical solution. In the Moldova growth facility, there are €420 million in grants foreseen: €285 million that the European Commission proposes to pay to Moldova and €135 million to keep as a guarantee for the loans from the Facility.
What we propose is to make all €420 million available to the Republic of Moldova and take the €135 million as a guarantee for the loans from an EU budget reserve. It’s called the ‘NDICI Cushion’ (Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument). However, the amount still available in the NDICI cushion is limited. It’s about €1.3 billion until 2027.
We see that both the Council and the Commission are prepared to improve the grants component. I understand the taking €135 million from the cushion erodes the cushion, and we don’t know what will happen between now and 2027. This is why our parliament’s position is that we’re flexible on the €135 million.
We have demanded 23%, and I understand that this is too much. Now, our objective should be to have 20% pre-financing and 20% grants component.
Is the fact that the presidency negotiating is the Polish one, which knows the situation of countries like Moldova more than other countries, helping the negotiations?
I’m seeing excellent Polish diplomats who are faithfully representing the position of the Council. But I’m also seeing that in spite of budgetary constraints, there is a clear political will in the Council to support the Republic of Moldova. (…) Member States are aware of the increased importance of this small country, and we don't really see any opposition in helping Moldova.
Russian disinformation is rife in Moldova. How to convince Moldovan people of the interest of the EU and how to fight against this disinformation in the country?
Disinformation is everywhere in the country. This is why our tackling of this disinformation and our communication has to be present everywhere as well. Europe has to be more present outside the capital, outside the urban centres which are pro-European.
What we have to do is travel to rural areas, promote the investments that we are doing.
This type of action and communication will not produce miracles in the short term. We will not convert the anti-European voters immediately, but I am convinced that in the long term, it will produce results.
The Republic of Moldova is a candidate country. Do you think it will be possible to open the first ’cluster’ of accession negotiation chapters in the near future?
Yes. The screening is going very well. Our objective should be that we open the first two ‘clusters’ before the end of the Polish presidency, with the first cluster as soon as possible in spring.