The Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the EU will this week try to secure agreements on the operation of each of the three major blocks that will structure the post-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). New compromise proposals will therefore be on Coreper’s table on Wednesday concerning the future Competitiveness Fund and the Global Europe programme (which will finance the EU’s external action). Discussion among the EU27 ambassadors in Brussels on the new National and Regional Partnership Plans (or ‘NRPPs’) will, however, wait until Friday. It is on this last issue that an agreement, which would require a qualified majority of the Member States, appears most difficult. This is so even though the Presidency plans to add to the implementation of these plans the strong dose of “flexibility” demanded by many capitals.
“We have reached a mature and balanced compromise on the three issues. The room for manoeuvre is now very limited, so the time has come to conclude”, a European diplomat nevertheless said on Monday. Where appropriate, so-called “partial” general approaches (because these compromises would not include the figures, which are being negotiated separately – see EUROPE 13883/20) would be endorsed next Tuesday 16 June, in Luxembourg, by ministers responsible for European Affairs.
A major innovation of the next budget, as proposed by the Commission last July (see EUROPE 13682/1), the National Plans are directly inspired by the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) of the post-Covid-19 recovery fund. These NRPPs, which notably absorb the agricultural and Cohesion Policies (see EUROPE 13874/1), are thus supposed to embody the shift from a cost-based expenditure management system to a performance-based rationale. Indeed, the Next Generation EU recovery fund linked the disbursement of EU grants to the prior fulfilment of milestones and targets laid down in national plans.
However, this transition in the context of the European budget has frightened certain Member States, starting with those that are the main beneficiaries of cohesion policy. These concerns should largely be taken into account. “We are striving to make this regulation acceptable to everyone by relying more heavily on the existing structures of Cohesion. The aim is to offer the maximum level of flexibility in applying the new delivery model, while strengthening the predictability and proportionality of the performance-based approach”, a European diplomat summed up on Monday.
In practical terms, the States could claim more weight vis-à-vis the Commission in designing the future plans, particularly in choosing which measures to include, or not. This flexibility should also concern the point at which capitals may submit their payment requests, with greater continuity envisaged compared with the current operation of Cohesion.
Lastly, the EU Council should come out in favour of much greater latitude to amend the content of the national plans throughout the budgetary cycle. (Original version in French by Clément Solal)