Brussels, 23/05/2005 (Agence Europe) - In Brussels on Sunday evening the European foreign ministers were able to gauge the depth of the chasm to be bridged in order to arrive at political agreement by the end of June on the EU's Financial Perspectives for 2007-2013. The Luxembourg Presidency's new compromise text (see EUROPE 8950) has been criticised by a series of countries and by the European Commission, whose President, Jose Manuel Barroso, said it was disappointing and lacking in ambition. Addressing reporters on Monday, the President of the Council, Jean Asselborn, said the Luxembourg Presidency was very encouraged at the end of the meeting. He said the Luxembourg Presidency's approach had been appreciated by delegations as the only possible way of reaching agreement, even though some delegations were still far from happy with the details of various proposals. Asselborn said this was perfectly normal at this stage in the negotiations and they were on track since nobody is very happy but nobody is demoralised either, which is a good sign. He said he was relatively optimistic about the change of reaching agreement at the June European Council. The Luxembourg Presidency said that all the ministers had expressed a desire to decide on the Financial Perspectives by the end of June. In the meantime, there will be bilateral meetings at the highest level between the Luxembourg Presidency and the Member States, and a new conclave of foreign ministers on 12 June ahead of the upcoming General Affairs Council, said Asselborn.
Asked about the potential impact of political developments in Germany (moves are being made in the direction of early elections in October) on the negotiations over the EU's Financial Perspectives, Asselborn said that German government and opposition politicians alike were responsible people who would be at pains to ensure Europe moves forward, even during this transition phase. He added that if political events in Germany made the Luxembourg Presidency's takes more difficult, this factor alone would not lead to failure.
On the total volume of spending, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom, France and Austria declared during the debate on Sunday that the presidency compromise was not rigorous enough and reiterated their position supporting a budget that did not go beyond 1% of Gross National Income (GNI) of the enlarged EU. Germany and the Netherlands said that they were very dissatisfied with suggestions on cohesion policy, for which the presidency suggested an envelope of between EUR 300-315 bn over seven years (EUR 336 bn according to the Commission proposal). Germany and the Netherlands consider that the text goes in the wrong direction as it does not focus aid on the new Member States alone. These countries also criticised the favour granted Spain (gradual elimination of cohesion funds in stead of getting rid of them immediately). Baltic countries said that the compromise went in the right direction, notably since the taking into account that the maximum level of regional policy fund transfers, GDP calculations based on the mot recent statistics (taking into account the strong growth in these countries). Greece and Portugal stated that the amount forecast by the presidency was insufficient.
On agriculture, France, Ireland and Greece called for respect of the agreement reached at the European Council of October 2002 on farm market spending. The reductions suggested by the Presidency in rural development spending have been criticised by Greece and Poland in particular. The Netherlands, however, want savings to be made in this area.
Other own resources subjects discussed included the British rebate. The Luxembourg Presidency is proposing that the rebate be calculated in 2007 using an average referring back to the most recent round of enlargement but long enough to be representative. The amount should be reduced from 2008 onwards. The UK has threatened to apply its veto to any challenge to the rebate, saying it is still fully justified. Italy, however, feels that the Presidency's suggestions are not far-reaching enough and would calculate a budget deficit of between EUR 7 and 8 bn a year. France says the reduction in the British rebate is the key issue at stake and a final date should be set for reducing the rebate to zero. Germany feels that the British rebate is not a sacred cow.
Specific measures for net contributors: according to the presidency text, this will mean setting up in 2007-13, specific measures helping Germany, Netherlands and Sweden, funded by all Member States in proportion to their respective GNP. Many countries (Portugal, Greece, Finland and Poland) are opposed to a general correction mechanism