Current political events (terrorism and its repercussions) and institutional affairs (preparing for the Laeken Summit) have led me to somewhat neglect "standard" European affairs, despite their economic, social and sometimes political importance. I tried to give an update on takeover bids in the second week of September, but that is (almost) all. But there are a number of dossiers that merit being followed with attention, three of which are: a) the ever more heated discussions concerning the European Commission's competition policy which also touch on fundamental and even institutional issues; b) developments in the debate over the review of regulations on public tendering; c) the renewed polemic on services of general interest. I will soon be attempting to cover each of these dossiers.
I feel guilty. I must first express guilt at not having commented on the Commission's analysis of the implementation of the Budget for 2000, including information about "net contributing" countries (see our newsletter of 26 September, p.12). Some readers will no doubt not have forgotten the highly charged debate that surrounded the issue of net contributions to the EU's expenditure for several years, when this information was confidential because the Commission refused to publish it on the grounds that it gave a false impression of the real benefits that the different Member States gained from membership of the Union. The need for transparency has played a role here too and the information is available to all today. Some time back, the former imbalances had led to the "British rebate" (with Mrs Thatcher's famous slogan: "I want my money back") and also to frustration on the part of Dutch and German citizens, who were convinced by demagogic media campaigns and a handful of politicians seeking cheap popularity, that they were in fact subsidising waste and fraud in Brussels. The information for the year 2000 reveal that:
- Germany's net contribution is gradually being cut and has fallen from EUR 12.2 billion in 1995 to EUR 9.2 billion in 2000. In terms of GDP, the main net contributor were (in order) Sweden (0.50% of GDP), Germany (0.47%), the Netherlands (0.44%), Luxembourg (0.35%), Austria (0.27%) and the United Kingdom (0.25%), none of which is a high percentage.
- the main net beneficiaries are still the four countries from the Cohesion Fund, which confirms the redistribution effect of the European budget. Greece gets a huge contribution, corresponding to 3.65% of GDP, but Portugal (1.93%) and Ireland (1.83%) also receive a significant amount. The amount Spain receives had slipped below 1% for the first time (to 0.96%) but this may rise a little in the future. This is not the right time to scrap one of the basic principles at the heart of the EU, the principle of solidarity.
The Dutch timebomb. The figures therefore show that the budget timebomb has more or less stopped ticking away. But all this will change again with enlargement and in any event, the current system runs out in 2006, when the budgetary negotiations are likely to be very difficult once again. The question arises of whether the institutions should start dealing with this matter right now, by discussing for example the Dutch memorandum on the substance of the issue, or whether it would be better to wait until a date closer to the end date of the current system? Thought needs to be devoted to this question since the Dutch memorandum exists and cannot be wished away.