The discussion between the European Affairs ministers on the subject of the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), on Tuesday 26 May in Brussels, turned into a clash between two camps. The first, comprising the so-called “frugal” Member States in the North, defended a smaller long-term budget focused on “new priorities” such as defence and competitiveness, while the second, concentrated in the East, firmly rejected cuts to cohesion policy in particular. This polarisation, which appears to be partly artificial - so great are the internal nuances on both sides - seems above all destined to influence the work of the Cyprus Presidency, whose negotiating box with figures is expected by mid-June.
On the eve of the ‘General Affairs’ Council (GAC) on Monday evening, a group of sixteen self-proclaimed “Friends of Cohesion” led by Romania and drawn mainly from the East but also from the South of the EU, published a joint declaration in defence of the historical spending headings of the European budget.
“In the Commission’s proposal, Cohesion Policy and agricultural and fisheries policies [CAP and CFP] are the only ones to suffer cuts in real terms, despite the overall increase in the size of the new MFF”, points out this document, signed by Italy, Poland and Spain. These countries, which also include the Czech Republic, the Baltic States and Portugal, are calling for “an increase in allocations (...) in heading 1” of the next MFF, to benefit these policies, which “meet objectives based on the Treaties” and are “among the most visible for citizens”.
“Competitiveness and cohesion are not in competition: they are in fact two sides of the same coin”, the Italian Minister for European Affairs, Tommaso Foti, subsequently argued on Tuesday afternoon during the debate on the post-2027 MFF, held in public session.
“We must continue to treat cohesion policy as an investment policy”, agreed the Romanian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Oana-Silvia Țoiu. The Commission proposed “reallocating part” of the nearly €400 billion earmarked for the crisis management mechanism, according to the Commission’s initial proposal, to cohesion.
“Cohesion and the CAP are essential from the point of view of the single market”, added the Polish Secretary of State, Ignacy Niemczycki, during this round table discussion, pointing out the explosion in his country’s industrial and agricultural exports since Poland joined the EU in 2004, thanks to this budgetary redistribution towards the least developed regions. “There are many ‘Friends of Cohesion’. We are about two-thirds of the EU Member States. (...) So I think we’re in a very strong position”, he said.
But the joint offensive by these sixteen countries has been met with considerable resistance. Representatives of a group of nine “net contributors” to the common budget (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Austria, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Ireland and Belgium) met for breakfast on Tuesday morning ahead of the EU Council meeting.
However, they are far from all on the same wavelength. Germany and the sometimes “frugal” countries of the North, such as Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, have pushed for a more limited MFF compared to the Commission’s initial copy, and even more so, focused more on “new priorities”.
“We don’t see ourselves as ‘frugal’, but as modernisers”, argued the Danish Minister for European Affairs, Marie Bjerre. “We are prepared to discuss an increase in spending, but it must remain limited and focus on new challenges such as defence, security, Ukraine and competitiveness”, she summarised.
In any case, these countries have ruled out increasing the funds earmarked for cohesion. “The balance proposed by the Commission between the various headings must now be maintained. (...) Any other option would be a red line for us”, said Germany’s permanent representative to the EU, Thomas Ossowski. He also spoke of “unavoidable horizontal cuts”, pointing to the prospect of Germany “increasing its national contribution” by “75 to 80%”, which would be “unacceptable”.
On the same page is the Netherlands, whose Foreign Minister Tom Berendsen called for “across-the-board cuts”, particularly in “cohesion, agriculture and administration [of the EU institutions]”. The future of the “rebates” benefiting certain countries was also the subject of debate at the ministers’ table, as was the question of the pace of repayment of the joint debt resulting from the recovery plan (see EUROPE 13784/2).
“What is important is that we coordinate with like-minded countries - a substantial group - (...) in order to obtain concrete changes in the next proposal that we expect from the Presidency”, said Sweden’s Minister for European Affairs, Jessica Rosencrantz.
However, while they share an interest in moderating their national bills, the “net contributors” who met on Tuesday morning are far from united. France, in particular, is defending a common debt, new own resources and the maintenance of a large budget allocated to the CAP.
Belgium, like Ireland, which relies heavily on agricultural funding, also appears to occupy a more middle ground. “I don’t want to start falling into a logic of camps at this stage”, said the Irish Minister for European Affairs and Defence, Thomas Byrne, whose country will take over the next Presidency of the EU Council at the beginning of July.
In the meantime, the Cyprus Presidency’s ‘nego box’ could be unveiled as early as 10 June. Despite strong differences of opinion, the Cypriot Minister for European Affairs, Marilena Raouna, assured at a press conference that she could “see landing spots” for reconciling the Member States on the various issues. (Original version in French by Clément Solal)